We are living in an age of anxiety. People face multiple existential crises such as climate change and conflicts that could potentially escalate into nuclear war.
So how do people cope with competing threats like this? And what happens to climate anxiety when wars suddenly erupt and compete for our attention?
Climate change affects our physical and mental health, directly through extreme climate-related droughts, wildfires and intense storms. It also affects some people indirectly through so-called “climate anxiety”. This term covers a range of negative emotions and states, including not just anxiety, but worry and concern, hopelessness, anger, fear, grief and sadness.
A team of researchers led by Caroline Hickman from the University of Bath surveyed 10,000 children and young people (aged 16 to 25 years) in ten countries (Australia, Brazil, Finland, France, India, Nigeria, Philippines, Portugal, the UK and the US). They found that 45% of respondents said their feelings about climate change negatively affected their daily lives. It was worse for respondents from developing countries.
Climate anxiety can potentially serve a positive function. Anger, for example, can push people to act to help mitigate the effects of climate change.
But it can also lead to “eco-paralysis”, a feeling of being overwhelmed, inhibiting people from taking any effective action, affecting their sleep, work and study, as a result of them dwelling endlessly on the problem.
Climate anxiety is not included in the American Psychiatric Association’s authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. In other words, it is not officially recognised as a mental disorder.
Some say this is a good thing. The author and Stanford academic Britt Wray wrote: “The last thing we want is to pathologise this moral emotion, which stems from an accurate understanding of the severity of our planetary health crisis.”
But if it is not officially recognised, will people take it seriously enough? Will they just dismiss people who suffer from it as “snowflakes” – too sensitive and too easily hurt by the hard realities of life. This is a major dilemma.
I explore how climate anxiety relates to other types of clinical anxiety in my recent book, Understanding Climate Anxiety, recognising that there are adaptive and non-adaptive forms of anxiety.
According to Steven Taylor, a clinical psychologist from the University of British Columbia, adaptive anxiety can “motivate climate activism, such as efforts to reduce one’s carbon footprint”. Maladaptive anxiety, however, may “take the form of anxious passivity”, he warned, where the person feels anxious but utterly helpless.
Identifying different types of climate anxiety, understanding their precursors and how they interact with personality is a major psychological challenge. Identifying ways of alleviating climate anxiety and making it more adaptive, and focused on possible climate mitigation, is a major societal challenge.
But there’s another important issue. Some global leaders, including Donald Trump, don’t believe in human-induced climate change, claiming it’s “one of the great scams”. He seems to view climate anxiety as an overblown reaction to propaganda pumped out by a biased media.
This can make the experience much worse for those who feel anxious but then having their feelings dismissed.
Some psychologists argue that climate anxiety can be a form of pre-traumatic stress disorder. This hypothesis arose from observations of climate scientists and their growing feelings of anger, distress, helplessness and depression as the climate situation has worsened.
In 2015, researchers devised a new clinical measure to assess pre-traumatic stress reactions using items found in the diagnostic and statistical manual for post-traumatic stress disorder, but now focused on the future rather than the past, asking about “repeated, disturbing dreams of a possible future stressful experience”, for example.
They tested Danish soldiers before their deployment in Afghanistan and found that “involuntary intrusive images and thoughts of possible future events … were experienced at the same level as post-traumatic stress reactions to past events before and during deployment”.
They also found that soldiers who experienced higher levels of pre-traumatic stress before deployment had an increased risk of post-traumatic stress disorder after their return from the war zone. Their hypervigilance primed their nervous system to react more strongly when anything untoward occurred.
This would suggest that we need to take stress reactions to future anticipated events such as climate change very seriously.
The crisis response
But how important is climate anxiety in the context of these other threats? Researchers assessed the emotional state and mental health of people aged 18 to 29 years in five countries (China, Portugal, South Africa, the US and UK) focusing on three global issues: climate change, an environmental disaster (the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan), and the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.
They found the strongest emotional engagement was with the ongoing wars, with climate change a close second, and the radiation leak third. The strongest emotional responses to the wars were concern, sadness, helplessness, disgust, outrage and anger. For climate change, the strongest responses were concern, sadness, helplessness, disappointment and anxiety.
All three crises made young people feel concerned, sad, and very importantly helpless, but climate change has this burning level of anxiety added into the bubbling mix.
It seems that climate anxiety still has this undiminished power regardless of all the other awful things that are currently happening in the world, and I suspect the stigma of being dismissed as “snowflakes” makes this particular fear response all the more unbearable.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?_
Geoff Beattie has received funding from the British Academy and the AHRC to investigate psychological barriers to climate change mitigation and the effects of climate change on emotional responses.
For the past few weeks the headlines about Gaza have focused on the hundreds of people who have been killed while queueing for food. The aid distribution system put in place in May, backed by the US and Israel and run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, has proved to be chaotic and allegedly resulted in violence, with both Israel Defense Forces personnel and armed Palestinian gangs blamed for killing about 1,000 people in the two months the new system has been operating.
Now the headlines are focusing on the growing number of people dying of starvation.
Harrowing reports from the Gaza Strip report almost daily on the children dying of malnutrition in hospitals and clinics that simply don’t have the food to keep them alive. Writing in the Guardian this week, a British volunteer surgeon working in one of Gaza’s hospitals, Nick Maynard, described patients who “deteriorate and die, not from their injuries, but because they are too malnourished to survive surgery”.
The UK and 27 other countries this week has condemned the “drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians” who are trying to get food and water. And yet, writes Simon Mabon, still the world’s leaders look on: “Most are apparently content to condemn – but little action has been taken.”
Mabon, a professor of international relations at Lancaster University, quotes the latest report from the IPC, which monitors food security in conflict situations. It estimates that 500,000 people in Gaza are considered to be facing “catastrophe”, while a further 1.1 million fall into the “emergency” risk category. Both categories anticipate a steadily rising death rate among civilians in Gaza.
So how can Israel’s allies apply pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to bring an end to the violence and allow Palestinian civilians access to the food, water and medical supplies they so desperately need?
Mabon canvasses a range of options. First of all, countries that have yet to recognise the state of Palestine can do so. It’s nonsense, Madon believes, to talk of a two-state solution – as the UK government does – when you haven’t actually recognised the second state in the equation.
Then they could stop selling arms to Israel. Many countries already have. But the US still issues export licenses for some weapons that are sold to Israel.
There are a plethora of other things world leaders could do to pressure Israel. Mabon recommends having a look at what the world did to isolate South Africa during the apartheid years, measures which eventually helped bring about meaningful change there.
As for Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister is reported to be considering an early election. In previous months this looked like a move freighted with jeopardy. An election loss brought on by a disenchanted electorate, heartbroken at the hostage situation and exhausted by the conflict, would probably mean having to face the charges of corruption which have hung over him for more than five years.
But recent polls have suggested a bump in popularity following his 12-day campaign against Iran. Netanyahu is nothing if not a clever political manipulator. But Brian Brivati, a professor of contemporary history and human rights at Kingston University, believes that to have a chance of winning, the prime minister will need to fight a campaign on three narratives of his government’s success: securing the release of the hostages, defeating Hamas and delivering regional security. “It is a tall order,” Brivati concludes.
Anyone following the situation in Gaza over the past 18 months will have encountered Francesca Albanese, the UN’s special rapporteur for Palestine’s occupied territories. For three years she has monitored the human rights situation in Gaza and the West Bank, delivering trenchant criticism of Israel’s conduct and those who, by their inaction – and sometimes contrivance – have enabled it.
Earlier this months, the US government imposed sanctions on Albanese, because – as US secretary of state Marco Rubio insisted – she has engaged with the International Criminal Court (also subject to US sanctions) “in efforts to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel”. Also she has written “threatening letters to dozens of entities worldwide, including major American companies”.
Alvina Hoffman, an expert in diplomatic affairs and human rights at SOAS, University of London, explains what a special rapporteur does and why their work is so valuable in the defence of human rights.
To Istanbul, where delegations from Russia and Ukraine met yesterday for their third round of face-to-face talks. All 40 minutes of them. There was another agreement of prisoner swaps and the two sides decided to set up some working groups to look into various political, military and humanitarian issues – but online rather in person.
The brevity of the talks came as no surprise to Stefan Wolff. Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham who has provided commentary for The Conversation throughout the conflict in Ukraine, points out that both sides remain wedded to their maximalist war aims. For Russia, this is for Ukraine to accept Russia’s annexation of Crimea and four provinces of eastern Ukraine, a ban on Ukraine’s membership of Nato and a much reduced military capacity. For Ukraine, it is getting their territory back and Russian acceptance of their national sovereignty, meaning it gets to determine for itself what alliances it seeks.
Donald Trump has told Vladimir Putin that, if there’s no ceasefire in 50 days, he’ll apply harsh secondary sanctions on the countries buying Russian oil and that he plans to supply Ukraine with American weapons (via Nato’s European member states, that is). Wolff believes both sides will now play the waiting game. They will calculate their next move after September 2, when the 50 days run out, and when they know more about what the US president plans to do.
Volodymyr Zelensky, meanwhile, faces pressure from his own people. There have been days of protest at his decision to bring two formerly independent anti-corruption organisations under the direct control of the government. He argues that this was necessary to prevent Russian infiltration, while critics are saying that the Ukrainian president has launched a power grab designed to prevent independent investigation of alleged corruption against people close to him.
Jenny Mathers says these protests, which involve people from all political shades, including people who have fought in the defence of Ukraine since 2022, some with visible injuries, represents a fracture of the “informal agreement between the government and society to show a united front to the world while the war continues”.
Ukrainians protest after Zelensky signs law clamping down on anticorruption agencies.
It’s not as if Zelensky is in clear and present danger of losing his job. His party holds a majority of seats in the Ukrainian parliament, so he governs without having to depend on coalition partners. And the country’s constitution prohibits the holding of elections in wartime – whatever Putin, who regularly insists that Zelensky is an illegitimate leader because he is governing past his term limit, might think. Plus his approval rating sits at 65%.
Zelensky has been quick to soften his stance on this. Mathers says that political corruption is a very sore point in Ukraine, where there was decades of it until the Maidan protests of 2013-14 unseated the pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych. As she writes here, “the ‘Revolution of Dignity’ that rejected Yanukovych’s leadership and his policies was also a resounding demonstration of the strength of Ukraine’s civil society and its determination to hold its elected officials to account. Zelensky would be rash not to heed that.
He also knows it’s important for him to present a squeaky clean image to his supporters in the west. So while the protests may not present an immediate threat to his own position, he knows that unless he acts to root out corruption in Ukraine, it’ll be a threat to the future of the country itself.
But ethicist Marcel Vondermassen from the University of Tübingen believes another recent decision by the Ukrainian government is storing up trouble for the future. Ukraine has recently announced its decision to pull out of the Ottawa convention, the treaty that forbids the use of anti-personnel landmines.
In doing so, he’s following the example of Finland, Poland, Lithuania and Estonia which have all also quite the treaty in recent months for fear of Russian aggression.
But as Vondermassen points out, landmines don’t usually switch themselves off when a conflict ends and people are still being killed an maimed in former conflict zones around the world. Often it is farmers at work or children at play who are the victims. If other ways to protect countries from aggression aren’t pursued, as he puts it, in future decades we’ll still be “counting thousands of child casualties … from the landmines laid in the 2020s”.
Thailand-Cambodia: centuries-old dispute flares again
A dispute between the two south-east Asian countries that has been simmering since May flared into life yesterday when five Thai soldiers patrolling the border region were injured after stepping on a landmine – the second such incident in the past week. Both countries have sealed their border and there have been tit-for-tat ambassadorial expulsions.
Cambodia fired rockets and artillery into Thailand, killing 12 civilians. Thailand in turn has launched airstrikes against Cambodia. Both countries are blaming the other for starting it.
Petra Alderman, an expert in south-east Asian politics from London School of Economics and Political Science, traces the origins of this row, which go back to the colonial era in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pandora Syperek, Tutor, History of Design, V&A/Royal College of Art, and Teaching Fellow, Institute for Creative Futures, Loughborough University
There has been a conspicuous turn to the sea as inspiration for art and exhibitions since the mid-2010s. This is a trend we have charted in our ongoing collaborative research project, Curating the Sea. So prolific has this become, that there are even gallery spaces dedicated entirely to the sea in contemporary art.
The sea has, of course, been the subject of art throughout history. However, our investigation into contemporary art and exhibitions has revealed a shift from celebrations of oceanic abundance and wonder towards more political projects.
In our research, we have argued for the importance of curation as a way to confront the issues facing the oceans today. So it was only natural that we turn our hands to curating our own exhibition about the sea, based on our extensive collaborative research.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Western art has tended to frame the ocean as an unfathomable and formidable force in the tradition of the sublime: art that produces or is inspired by the strongest emotions the mind is capable of feeling, often arising from the encounter with the natural world. Sea Inside counters this perspective. Collectively, artworks in the exhibition portray the sea not as a surreal or alien space, but as an entity that is intimately connected to humans.
Many Indigenous and diasporic communities have long been aware of the profound human connection to the sea. In our exhibition, Shuvinai Ashoona’s coloured pencil drawings illustrate the intermingling of Inuit mythology with everyday life in the Canadian Arctic. In one scene, mythical marine creatures populate a dentist’s office.
Meanwhile, Tyler Eash’s sculpture features a shell of the critically endangered abalone mollusc. They are known as “grandmother shells” among North American west coast Indigenous cultures as they are commonly passed down through families by female elders. The work speaks to ties of kinship (human and animal), their fragility and resilience.
A new sculpture we commissioned by the artist Gabriella Hirst explores tales of men being swallowed by whales alongside the industrial exploitation of whales in the 19th century. This inside-out journey from the whale’s belly to lighting up European cities (as whale blubber was used in oil lamps) aligns the perceived threat of these animals with capitalistic justifications for their slaughter. The sculpture is made from agricultural plastic, itself a product of the petrochemical industry that largely replaced whaling as a source of energy, lighting and everyday objects.
Beyond eco-realism
The perspective Sea Inside offers is found not only in the artworks’ subject matter but also their approach.
There has been a tendency towards a documentary approach within ecologically oriented exhibitions. This risks relegating art to a tool of climate communication and even replicating the sort of technological interventions into the landscape – and seascape – that the respective artworks and exhibitions call into question.
The artworks in Sea Inside examine the uses and limits of visual mediums for understanding the sea. Hiroshi Sugimoto’s photograph of a natural history diorama reframes this three-dimensional reconstruction of a seabed from hundreds of millions of years before the advent of humans, whereas Kasia Molga’s miniature aquaria entangle human tears and marine life.
Artists in the exhibition play with historical display practices and their ability to bring ocean life into human spaces while endeavouring to overcome the sense of detachment they have at times created.
In a video work by El Morgan, the artist aligns jellyfish breeding in a lab with her own experience of assisted reproduction. In doing so she momentarily suspends the distance from such radically different lifeforms and expands our understandings of gestation.
Likewise, Laure Prouvost’s speculative “cooling system” for global warming – a beautiful Murano glass shower-head that looks like an amorphous sea creature covered in nipples – reimagines models of care as both more-than-human and global.
Works such as these provide playful and humorous approaches to thinking through a topic with a serious undercurrent: our fragile ocean ecologies.
The artworks in Sea Inside offer ways of engaging with the existential threats facing our oceans that are emotive, imaginative and often very funny. They reflect on material culture, architecture and technology to acknowledge the aesthetic dimensions of an era that has been termed the Anthropocene, after the human impact on the planet, and even the Hydrocene in recognition of the centrality of water to our current epoch.
These subtler responses to the sea within offer visions of promise for the oceans’ and our own mutual survival.
Sea Inside is on show at the Sainsbury Centre, Norwich, until October 26 2025.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Sarah Wade works in the Department of Art History & World Art Studies, University of East Anglia, based at the Sainsbury Centre. Her ocean related research has received funding from University of East Anglia and the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art. She is a member of the Museums Association.
Pandora Syperek does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Technology platforms operating in the UK now have a legal duty to protect young people from some of the more dangerous forms of online content. This includes pornography, content that encourages, promotes, or provides instructions for violence, promotion of self-harm and eating disorders. Those failing to comply face hefty fines.
Until now, parents have had the unenviable role of navigating web content filters and app activity management to guard their children from harmful content. As of 25 July 2025, the Online Safety Actputs greater responsibility on platforms and content creators themselves.
In theory, this duty requires tech organisations to curb some of the features that make social media so popular. These include changing the configuration of the algorithms that analyse a user’s typical behaviour and offer content that other people like them usually engage with.
This is because the echo chambers that these algorithms create can push young people towards unwanted (and crucially, unsolicited) content, such as incel-related material.
The Online Safety Act directly acknowledges the impact of algorithms in targeting content to young people. It forms a key part of Ofcom’s proposed solutions. The act requires platforms to adjust their algorithms to filter out content likely to be harmful to young people.
It’s yet to become clear exactly how tech companies will respond. There has been pushback over negative attitudes to algorithms, though. A response from Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, to Ofcom’s 2024 consultation on protecting children from harms online counters the idea that “recommender systems are inherently harmful”.
It states: “Algorithms help to sort information and to create better experiences online and are designed to help recommend content that might be interesting, timely or entertaining. Algorithms also help to personalise a user’s experience, and help connect a user with their friends, family and interests. Most importantly, we use algorithms to help young people have age-appropriate experiences on our apps.”
Age verification
A further safety measure is the use of age checks. Here, Ofcom is enforcing platforms to make “robust age checks” and, in the case of the most serious of content creation sites, these must be “highly effective”.
Users will need to prove their age. Traditionally, age-verification checks involve the submission of government-issued documents – often accompanied by a short video to verify the accuracy of the submission. There have been technological advances which some platforms are embracing. Age-estimation services involve uploading a short video or photo selfie which is analysed by AI.
If enforced, the Online Safety Act may not only restrict access to pornography and other recognised extreme content, but it could also help stem the flow of knife sales.
Research shows exposure to knife crime news on social media is linked to symptoms similar to PTSD. Research by one of us (Charlotte Coleman) and colleagues has previously shown that negative effects of seeing knife imagery may be more severe for girls and those who already feel unsafe.
Even on strongly regulated platforms, though, some harmful material can seep through the algorithm and age checks net. Active moderation is therefore a further requirement of the act. This means platforms need to have processes in place to look at user-generated content, assess the potential harm and remove it if appropriate to ensure swift action is taken against content harmful to children.
This may be through proactive moderation (assessing content before it is published), reactive moderation based on user reports, or more likely, a combination of the two.
Even with these changes, invisible online spaces remain. A host of private, encrypted end-to-end messaging services, such as messages on Whatsapp and snaps on Snapchat, are impenetrable to Ofcom and the platform managers, and rightly so. It is a vital fundamental right that people are free to communicate with their friends and family privately without fear of monitoring or moderation.
However, that right may also be abused. Negative content, bullying and threats may also be circulated through these services. This remains a significant problem to be addressed and one that is not currently solved by the Online Safety Act.
These invisible online spaces may be an area that, for now, will remain in the hands of parents and carers to monitor and protect. It is clear that there are still many challenges ahead.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Charlotte Coleman has previously received funding from UKRI to understand the negative online experiences of UK police staff.
Jess Scott-Lewis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Travis Van Isacker, Senior Research Associate, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol
On a cold, wet November evening, Issa Mohamed Omar and more than 30 other men, women and children set off from their informal camp near the northern French port city of Dunkirk. They walked through the darkness in near-silence for around two hours, until they reached the beach from where they hoped to start a new and better life.
As they arrived, five men were busy pumping up an inflatable dinghy and attaching an outboard engine. These people smugglers had charged each of their customers more than a thousand euros for a trip that costs someone with the right passport less than a hundred.
The travellers were given life-vests, arranged into rows and counted. “There are 33 of you,” one of the smugglers said. For many on board, this was not their first attempt at reaching England.
Most came from Iraqi Kurdistan, including Kazhal Ahmed Khidir Al-Jammoor from Erbil, who was travelling with her three children: Hadiya, Mubin and Hasti Rizghar Hussein, respectively aged 22, 16 and seven.
A father and son from Egypt were shown how the engine worked and provided a GPS device and directions to Dover, around 35 miles (60km) to the west across the Channel. Mohamed Omar would later recall:
The Egyptian man was put in charge of steering the boat by the smugglers. He was travelling with his son, who looked like he was in his late teens or maybe early 20s. I do not know how they came to be the driver and navigator.
There were also at least three Ethiopian nationals – one of whom, father-of-two Fikiru Shiferaw from Addis Ababa, sent his wife Emebet at home in Ethiopia a final WhatsApp voice message:
We have already boarded the boat. We are on the way. I will turn off my phone now. Goodnight, I will call you tomorrow morning.
These were the last words she would ever receive from her husband.
What happened to Fikiru Shiferaw and the other passengers on the night of November 23-24 2021 has been the subject of the UK’s Cranston Inquiry which, during March 2025, heard from 22 witnesses to the disaster, including officers involved in the UK’s search-and-rescue (SAR) response. Chaired by former High Court judge Sir Ross Cranston, the independent inquiry also heard from Mohamed Omar from Somalia – one of only two survivors – as well as family members of many of the dead and missing.
These hearings not only shed light on the actions of UK Border Force and His Majesty’s Coastguard officers during the failed rescue operation – designated Incident Charlie – in the early hours of November 24, but the agencies’ approach to “small boat crossings” in general dating back to 2017.
According to the testimonies, officers had been operating under extreme pressure in the months leading up to the disaster. Kevin Toy, master of the Border Force ship Valiant which was sent out to search for the missing dinghy that night, explained that in the run-up to the incident, “night after night” he could see his crew were “utterly exhausted” by the end of their shifts.
The evidence shows the British government was aware of the growing risk that Border Force and HM Coastguard could be overwhelmed by the rising number of small boat crossings – and that people might die as a result. In May 2020, a document produced by the Department for Transport acknowledged that “SAR resources can be overwhelmed if current incident numbers persist”. At least three senior HM Coastguard officers identified the same risk in August 2021.
Multiple communication failures have also been exposed by the inquiry – among British officers, with their opposite numbers in France, and between both countries’ emergency services and the increasingly desperate people aboard the sinking dinghy.
Despite numerous distress calls and GPS coordinates being shared via WhatsApp, a rescue boat failed to reach the travellers in time. Amid the confusion, when their calls stopped, the coastguard assumed Charlie’s passengers had been picked up and were safe. In fact, they were perishing in the cold waters of the Channel over more than ten hours.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
As part of my research into the digital transformation of the UK-France border, I attended the inquiry and have studied the many statements, call transcripts, operational logs, emails and meeting minutes it has made public. Initially, I wanted to understand how the November 2021 disaster became a watershed moment in the UK government’s response to people trying to cross the Channel by small boat or dinghy, catalysing the transformation of the UK’s maritime border into the hyper-surveilled space it is today.
But, after speaking to representatives for Mohamed Omar and the bereaved families as well as migrant rights organisations, larger questions have emerged. In particular, given the inquiry’s singular focus on this one catastrophic event in November 2021, those I spoke to are concerned that its recommendations will be unable to prevent further deaths from occurring in the Channel, which have risen dramatically over the last 18 months.
How ‘small boat crossings’ began
Since the UK and France began operating “juxtaposed” border controls in the early 1990s (meaning border checks occur before departure), asylum seekers trying to reach England have had to make irregular journeys across the Channel. Until 2018, these were typically aboard trains and ferries – after sneaking on to a lorry or through a French port’s perimeter security.
At the time of the “Jungle” camp near Calais in 2015-16, media coverage of collective attempts by its residents to enter French ports spiked UK government investment in the border. Between 2014 and 2018, it gave its French counterpart at least £123 million to “strengthen the border and maintain juxtaposed controls”. These funds paid for French police to patrol the ports and border cities, regularly evict migrants’ living sites, and finance detention and relocation centres.
As admitted by then-home secretary Sajid Javid in 2019, this increased security led people to find other ways across the Channel. Beginning in the winter of 2018, smugglers organised journeys in small, seaworthy vessels they had stolen from marinas along the French coast. These “small boats” continue to lend their name to this migration phenomenon – yet the unseaworthy inflatable dinghies used today, with no keel or rigid hull, are not worthy of the name.
Even in the context of the usual sensationalism surrounding irregular migration to the UK, small boat journeys were met with an especially intense response, both politically and in the media.
When 101 people crossed between Christmas and New Year in 2018, Javid declared it a major incident. Ever since, “stopping the boats” has been one of the UK government’s highest priorities. Despite small boat arrivals making up only 29% of UK asylum claimants in 2018-24, billions of pounds have been spent to try and control the route.
Frosty relations and the ‘pushback’ plan
As Channel crossings rose sharply over 2020-21, worsening relations between France and the UK due to Brexit complicated how the two governments worked together to respond. In his testimony, former clandestine Channel threat commander Dan O’Mahoney – appointed by Javid’s successor, Priti Patel, to “make small boat crossings unviable” – described relations between the two countries as already “very frosty” when he began in August 2020.
After France’s then-interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, axed a plan for UK vessels to take rescued migrants back to Dunkirk, O’Mahoney was tasked by senior ministers to come up with an alternative. The resulting “pushback” plan, called Operation Sommen, involved Border Force officers on jet skis driving into migrant dinghies to turn them back as they crossed the border line into UK waters. When France learned of the plan, O’Mahoney recalled:
They thought it went counter to their and our obligations around safety of life at sea … They objected to it very strongly, and it affected our already quite strained relationship with them further.
Operation Sommen was abandoned in April 2022 before having ever been used in anger. However, preparations were said to have taken up “a very considerable amount of time and resource” at both the Home Office and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency – and had “a detrimental effect” on the UK’s overall SAR response to small boat crossings.
At a meeting of senior officials in June 2021 to discuss Operation Sommen, ministers had made clear that the “numbers of people crossing [was] a political problem” – and that improving SAR capabilities did not “fit with [the] narrative of taking back control of borders”.
Although senior HM Coastguard officers recognised “it is extremely difficult to locate small boats or communicate with those onboard”, the inquiry heard that officers did not recall receiving “any small boat training before November 2021”, other than in the procedure to allow Border Force to push them back to French waters.
The head of Border Force’s Maritime Command, Stephen Whitton, told the inquiry he was under “a huge amount of pressure” to prevent small boat crossings, while also “providing the bulk of the support to search and rescue”. Despite carrying out 90% of all small boat rescues in the Channel and “regularly being overwhelmed”, Border Force Maritime Command received “no additional assets to manage the search and rescue response” before November 2021.
‘The pressure we were under’
When the decision was taken for Border Force – a law enforcement rather than search-and-rescue organisation – to be the primary responders to small boat crossings in 2018, only around 100 people were crossing each month. Yet by the time of the disaster three years later, according to an internal Home Office document, the total for 2021 was “already more than 25,000”.
At the inquiry, O’Mahoney stated: “As 2021 went on, it became much clearer that … frankly, we just needed more [rescue] boats.” Whitton admitted that before the disaster, Border Force, HM Coastguard, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution and other support organisations were all “on our knees in terms of the pressure we were under, and it was getting hugely challenging”.
The evidence shows this pressure was acutely felt inside Dover’s Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre, which sits atop the port’s famous white cliffs offering a commanding view of the Channel. Inside, Coastguard officers coordinate SAR operations and control vessel traffic in the Dover Strait – one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes.
On the night of November 23-24, three coastguard officers were on search-and-rescue duty: team leader Neal Gibson, maritime operations officer Stuart Downs, and a trainee – unnamed by the inquiry – who was officially only present as an observer.
HM Coastguard’s Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre at Dover overlooking the Channel. Travis Van Isacker, CC BY-NC-SA
Staffing appears to have been a longstanding issue at the Dover coastguard station where, according to divisional commander Mike Bill, there was “poor retention of staff” and “experience and competence weren’t the best”. Only the day before the disaster, during a migrant red days meeting – convened when, due to good weather, the probability of Channel crossers is considered “highly likely” – chief coastguard Peter Mizen had warned that only having two qualified officers at Dover on nights “isn’t enough”.
Over recent months, as the station had become busier responding to small boat crossings and in the wake of an unsuccessful recruitment drive, staff were having to work flat-out throughout their shifts, and were being asked to come in on scheduled days off.
On the night of November 23-24, owing to staff shortages, team leader Gibson told the inquiry he had to cover traffic control duties for three hours from 10.30pm. This meant he was away from the SAR desk at 00.41am, when a message arrived from the national rescue coordination centre along the coast in Fareham, stating that the Coastguard’s scheduled surveillance aeroplanes would not be flying over the Channel that night due to fog.
The officers were told they would be “effectively blind” – and should not allow themselves “to be drawn into relaxing and expecting a normal migrant crossing night”. The message warned: “This has the potential to be very dangerous.”
‘Their boat – there’s nothing left’
According to Mohamed Omar, the sea was calm when he and the other passengers departed the French beach around 9pm UK time. Giving his evidence to the Cranston Inquiry from Paris – he still cannot travel to the UK – a ship approached them around an hour into their voyage:
They came up to us to see what we were doing, and shone a light on us. I remember seeing a French flag on the boat. It was a big boat and I am certain it was the French coastguard. I had heard from people I met in the camp in Dunkirk that this happened sometimes, and that the French boat would follow until you reached English waters.
In fact, Mohamed Omar said, the French ship left the travellers again after about an hour. Shortly after this, the problems began.
A French warship patrols the shore of Mardyck in northern France, close to where Charlie is thought to have departed. Travis Van Isacker, CC BY-NC-SA
Around 1am, seawater began entering the dinghy. By now, it was in the vicinity of the Sandettie lightvessel, around 20 miles north-east of Dover. At first, passengers managed to bail out the 13°C water – but soon the flooding became uncontrollable. The dinghy’s inflatable tube began losing pressure, and a couple of the Kurdish men used air pumps to try to keep it inflated. Others tried to prevent panic spreading among the passengers.
Many onboard began to make frantic calls for rescue. What were reported to be leaked transcripts of some of these calls were published by French newspaper Le Monde a year after the sinking. They showed the first distress call from the dinghy was received by the French coastguard at 12.48am. Speaking in English, the caller said there were 33 people on board a “broken” boat.
According to Le Monde, three minutes later, another call was transferred to the French maritime rescue coordination centre at Cap Gris-Nez by an emergency operator who reported: “Apparently their boat – there’s nothing left.” Following procedure, the French coastguard officer asked the caller to send a GPS position by WhatsApp so she could “send a rescue boat as soon as possible”. At 1.05am UK time, the GPS position arrived.
Rather than send a French boat, Le Monde reported that the officer phoned her counterparts in Dover to warn them a dinghy 0.6 nautical miles from the border line would soon be crossing into UK waters. On the other end of the line was the trainee officer, who was handling routine calls that night despite officially only being an observer.
After the call finished, according to Downs’s evidence to the inquiry, the trainee mistakenly told him the dinghy was thought to be “in good condition” – information he recorded in the log for Incident Charlie. This miscommunication may have affected the urgency of the UK’s SAR response, preventing HM Coastguard and Border Force from appreciating the severe distress the “broken” dinghy was in.
Just before 1am, the French coastguard had sent its migrant tracker spreadsheet, containing information on all small boat crossings that night, to HM Coastguard for the first time. It showed four migrant dinghies at sea – which Gris-Nez had been aware of “for many hours”, according to Gibson.
The issue of the French coastguard appearing to withhold information about active small boat crossings had been raised by HM Coastguard’s clandestine operations liaison officer during a July 2021 review. And earlier that very evening, Gibson told one of his colleagues:
Sometimes they just seem to keep it quiet. Like we’ll not get anything – then we’ll get a tracker at three in the morning with 15 incidents, and they go: ‘Mostly these are in your search-and-rescue region.’ Wonderful.
At 1.20am, Downs phoned Border Force Maritime Command in Portsmouth to request a Border Force vessel search for the dinghy Charlie. He provided the GPS position received from his French counterpart and the number of people onboard – but also the incorrect information that “they think it’s in good condition”.
Ten minutes later, the Valiant, Border Force’s 42-metre patrol ship stationed at Dover, was tasked to proceed towards the Sandettie lightvessel. At the same time, the first direct call to the Dover rescue coordination centre came in from Charlie. The distressed caller said they were “in the water” and that “everything [was] finished”.
Around 15 minutes later, at 1.48am, Gibson took a call from 16-year-old Mubin Rizghar Hussein, who spoke good English. Despite the noise and commotion, he managed to provide Gibson with a WhatsApp number – in order to share their GPS position. The transcript of this call records voices shouting in the background: “It’s finished. Finished. Brother, it’s finished.”
A ‘grave and imminent threat to life’
Gibson told the inquiry that after his call with Rizghar Hussein, he had a “gut feeling that this doesn’t feel quite as usual”. By “usual” he meant what was, according to maritime operations officer Downs, a commonly held belief at the Dover coastguard station that with “nine out of ten”“ callers from small boats: “It would generally be overstated that the boat … was sinking, people were drowning … Whatever was going on would be overstated.”
Acting on his gut feeling, at 2.27am Gibson took the unprecedented decision to broadcast a Mayday Relay – denoting a “grave and imminent threat to life”. By maritime law, this alert required other vessels to offer their assistance.
Gibson told the inquiry he did this to get the French warship Flamant to respond. He could see on his radar screen that Flamant was closest to Charlie’s position and was the best vessel to rescue the people if the dinghy really was sinking.
Why the Flamant did not respond is at the centre of an ongoing criminal investigation in France into two of the warship’s officers and five coastguards from Gris-Nez, for “non-assistance of persons in distress”. This investigation’s strict confidentiality obligation means the inquiry was unable to access any information from the French side about their operations that night.
At 2.01 and again at 2.14am, HM Coastguard had received new GPS positions via WhatsApp showing the dinghy to be more than a mile inside UK waters.
Valiant, having been tasked at 1.30am, only exited the port of Dover at 2.22am and would need at least another hour to reach the Sandettie. Despite this, no other vessel was sent to join the search. At 3.11am, when asked during a call by Border Force Maritime Command whether Charlie was “still a Mayday situation”, Gibson replied: “Well, they’ve told me it’s full of water.”
With a total of four small boats being shown in the Channel that night by the French tracker spreadsheet, Gibson suggested there could be as many as 110 people on board these dinghies – beyond Valiant’s capacity for taking on survivors. Nevertheless, Border Force and HM Coastguard opted to “wait and see what the numbers are, and whether Valiant can deal with that … We don’t want to call any other assets out just yet.”
In a call with Christopher Trubshaw, captain of the Coastguard rescue helicopter stationed at Lydd on the Kent coast, aviation tactical commander Dominic Golden explained that Border Force was “not prepared to bring in their crews who are pretty knackered” unless “we can convince them there are people in real danger”. He then asked Trubshaw to search the Channel for the small boats shown in the French tracker, as the surveillance aeroplanes had been unable to take off.
In her closing submission to the inquiry, Sonali Naik, a legal representative of the survivors and bereaved families, highlighted Golden’s “dismissive attitude” towards Charlie’s distress when he gave Trubshaw the reason for the request, which included the following:
As usual, the catalogue of phone calls is beginning to trickle in … You know, the classic ‘I am lost, I am sinking, my mother’s wheelchair is falling over the side’ etc. ‘Sharks with lasers surrounding boat’ and ‘we are all dying’ type of thing.
Nevertheless, Golden asked the helicopter crew to pack a liferaft. “I can’t imagine we’re going to need it but … potentially you get to play with one of your new toys.”
While Golden described his words as “unwise” or “flippant”, Naik said they were “more than that” – suggesting they revealed rescuers’ general perceptions of the occupants of small boats and the widely held scepticism towards their distress calls.
‘We are dying. Where is the boat?’
With the water inside rising fast and their dinghy collapsing, Charlie’s increasingly desperate passengers kept trying to get rescuers to appreciate how dire their situation was.
At 2.31am in the Dover rescue coordination centre, Gibson received a second call from Mubin Rizghar Hussein, who pleaded: “We are dying, where is the boat?”
Gibson replied: “The boat is on its way but it has to get …” only to be interrupted by Rizghar Hussein saying: “We all die. We all die.”
“I get that,” Gibson told the terrified teenager, “but unfortunately, you’re going to be patient and all stay together, because I can’t make the boat come any quicker.” He ended the call saying:
You need to stop making calls because every time you make a call, we think there’s another boat out there – and we don’t want to accidentally go chasing for another boat when it’s actually your boat we’re looking for.
Gibson broke down briefly when recounting this second call during his evidence to the inquiry, explaining:
If you don’t understand what’s fully going on and you’re getting ‘we’re all going to die’, it’s quite a distressing situation to find yourself in, sitting at the end of a phone – effectively helpless. You know where they are, you want to get a boat to them, and you can’t.
Call records also show that coastguards on both sides of the Channel passed responsibility for rescuing the sinking dinghy off to one another. According to Le Monde, during one call a passenger told the French coastguard officer he was “in the water” – to which she replied: “Yes, but you are in English waters.”
The transcript of the last call before Charlie capsized, made at 3.12am, reveals that Downs asked “where are you?” 17 times – despite the caller being unable to answer anything beyond “English waters”. The maritime operations officer finished by instructing the caller to hang up and dial 999: “If it won’t connect on 999, then you’re probably still in French waters.”
In her closing submission, Naik pointed to “discriminatory stereotypes and attitudes towards migrants on small boats which fatally affected the SAR response” for Charlie – as rescuers, in her words, “jumped to premature conclusions”. According to survivor Mohamed Omar:
Because we have been seen as refugees … that’s the reason why I believe the rescue, they did not come at all. We feel like we were … treated like animals.
Fatal assumptions
At 3.27am, Border Force’s ship Valiant arrived at Charlie’s last recorded GPS position (from 2.14am) – but found nothing. Its master, Kevin Toy, decided to head north-easterly towards the Sandettie lightvessel, the way the tide was flowing.
En route, Valiant spotted two other dinghies in the darkness using its night vision – one still making its way towards the English coast, the other stopped in the water. The stationary dinghy was in greater danger from the Channel’s shipping traffic, so Valiant went to it and began rescuing those onboard – radioing back that it had “engaged unlit migrant crafts stopped in the water” with approximately 40 people onboard.
In the Dover rescue coordination centre, Gibson assumed this dinghy could be Charlie and gave Mubin Rizghar Hussein’s name and telephone number so Valiant’s crew could verify whether he was on board. At 4.16am, Gibson himself tried calling the WhatsApp number that Rizghar Hussein had shared, but the call failed.
At 4.20am, Valiant completed its first rescue of the morning. Two more followed after the Coastguard helicopter spotted two other dinghies in the Sandettie area – but nobody in the water. A near-capacity Valiant then returned to Dover just after 8am with 98 survivors on board.
None of the three rescued dinghies matched the description of Charlie. All were in good condition, differently coloured, and with disparate numbers of people onboard – yet the misplaced assumption Charlie had been rescued persisted amid the night’s murky information environment. Gibson stated that, while he had soon received additional information matching Valiant’s first rescue to a different dinghy, he was still “fairly certain Charlie had been picked up”.
“Once Valiant had picked up these [three] boats,” he explained, “we no longer received calls from Charlie, and a call to a known phone number on Charlie failed.” As a result, neither Valiant nor the Coastguard helicopter were sent back out to continue searching for the stricken dinghy.
In fact, Gibson’s call to Rizghar Hussein’s WhatsApp number did not fail because Charlie’s passengers had been rescued – nor because they had thrown their phones into the sea when Border Force arrived. Rather, it was because the dinghy had capsized and everyone had fallen into the Channel’s freezing waters.
‘No one came to our rescue’
In harrowing evidence to the inquiry, Mohamed Omar explained how, as one side of the dinghy deflated, the passengers – “hysterical and crying” – panicked and moved to the opposite side. This shift in weight caused the dinghy to capsize:
The screaming when the boat tipped and people fell in the water was deafening. I have never heard anything as desperate as this. I was not thinking about whether we were going to be rescued any more; it was all about how to stay alive.
As the passengers were thrown into the water, the dinghy flipped on top of them. Mohamed Omar described having to swim out from underneath to catch a breath: “It was dark and I could not really see. It was extremely cold and the sea was rough.”
As he surfaced, he saw Halima Mohammed Shikh, a mother of three also from Somalia and travelling alone, struggling as she couldn’t swim. She screamed his name for help, and he tried to get her back to what was left of the dinghy – but couldn’t. “I think she was one of the first people to drown,” he told the inquiry.
Others managed to cling to the broken inflatable, hoping rescue was on its way – but “no one came to our rescue”. Pushed and pulled by the waves, some lost their grip and drifted away before dawn. Mohamed Omar recalled:
All night, I was holding on to what remained of the boat. In the morning, I could hear the people were screaming and everything. It’s something I cannot forget in my mind.
By the time the sun finally rose at 7.26am, he estimated that no more than 15 people were left clinging to the broken dinghy – adrift on the tide in a busy shipping lane:
I do not recall speaking with anyone in the water. Those who were alive were half-dead. There was nothing we could do any more. I could see bodies floating all around us in the water. I presume most people were either already dead or were unconscious.
Shortly afterwards, Mohamed Omar said he let go of the dinghy and began to swim, thinking to himself: “I am going to die [but] I don’t want to die here. At least if I die whilst swimming, I won’t feel it.”
He swam towards a boat he could see in the distance and, as he got closer, began to wave his life jacket for attention. A French woman, out fishing with her family, saw him and jumped in the water to save him.
As he finished telling his story, Mohamed Omar told the inquiry: “I’m a voice for those people who passed away.”
Bodies are found
Around 1pm on the afternoon of November 24, 12 hours after the first distress calls from Charlie, a French commercial fishing vessel began finding bodies in the sea nine miles north-west of Calais. But as the news came in, no one at HM Coastguard or Border Force appears to have made the connection with Incident Charlie.
Days later, when the accounts of Mohamed Omar’s fellow survivor, Mohammed Shekha Ahmad from Iraqi Kurdistan, and a relative of two of the deceased emerged, the Home Office refuted their claims that the dinghy had sunk in UK waters as “completely untrue”.
However, five days after the disaster, Gibson contacted the small boats tactical commander to share his concerns that the reported deaths could be from Charlie. He had read a news article in which “the survivor states a male called Mubin called the emergency services, which could possibly be the ‘Moomin’ [sic] I spoke to”.
On December 1, clandestine Channel threat commander O’Mahoney responded to a question from the UK’s Joint Committee on Human Rights, as to whether the migrants whose bodies had been found in French waters had made distress calls to the UK authorities. O’Mahoney told the committee:
We are looking into that. To manage your expectation, though, it may never be possible to say with absolute accuracy whether that boat was in UK waters [and] I cannot tell you with any certainty that the people on that particular boat called the UK authorities.
Thanks largely to their grieving families tireless pursuit of the truth, however, it is now possible to say definitively that Charlie had been in UK waters – and that a number of its passengers spoke to HM Coastguard officers.
It was only after these families raised concerns that the disaster had involved the UK authorities that the Department for Transport commissioned a safety investigation into the incident in January 2022. A lawyer for the bereaved families suggested to me that without the threat of legal action, the Department for Transport “would likely not have done anything” – despite this being Britain’s worst maritime disaster for decades. Meanwhile, according to inquiry evidence, the Home Office is understood not to have conducted an internal review or investigation into its role in the disaster.
After a frustrating two years of waiting for the survivors and bereaved families, the Marine Accidents Investigations Branch published its report – which both confirmed most of their accounts and substantiated their criticisms of the SAR response.
Soon afterwards, the Cranston Inquiry was announced. Despite no bodies having been recovered in UK waters, it has been run almost like an inquest. In his final report – to be published by the end of 2025 – Sir Ross Cranston has promised to “consider what lessons can be learned and, if appropriate, make recommendations to reduce the risk of a similar event occurring”.
A ‘crucial and unique opportunity’
HM Coastguard and Border Force officers have repeatedly told the inquiry how the UK’s approach to small boat search-and-rescue has changed since the November 2021 disaster. More officers have been hired, Border Force has contracted additional boats to conduct rescues, information sharing has improved, and cooperation with French colleagues is better. Today, there are significantly more rescue ships on both sides of the Channel which can intervene faster when dinghies come to be in distress, and have undoubtedly saved many lives.
There has also been massive investment in drones, aeroplanes and powerful shore-based cameras to reduce the risk that HM Coastguard loses “maritime domain awareness” again if some of its surveillance aircraft are unable to fly. New technology automatically translates coastguard officers’ messages into different languages and extracts live GPS locations and images from travellers’ mobile devices.
Such investments make it unlikely that another dinghy could be lost in the middle of the Channel after its passengers call for help, in the way Charlie so catastrophically was.
Nevertheless, people continue dying while attempting to cross the Channel – with 2024 having been by far the deadliest year yet. At least 69 people lost their lives, according to the Refugee Council. So far in 2025, 24 people are documented as dead or missing at the UK-France border by Calais Migrant Solidarity, amid a record number of attempted crossings for the first half of the year.
Some migrants’ rights NGOs have suggested the UK’s “stop the boats” policies, and European efforts to disrupt the supply chain of dinghies and other equipment used in crossings, has driven such deadly overcrowding.
But it is also unlikely that the circumstances surrounding more recent deaths in the Channel will ever be investigated as thoroughly as Incident Charlie, if at all. Lawyers for the bereaved families have therefore been keen to highlight the Cranston Inquiry’s “crucial and unique opportunity” not only to look back and offer answers about one of Britain’s worst maritime disasters in recent decades – but to look forwards and “prevent the further loss of life at sea”.
The survivors, families and migrants’ rights organisations who contributed their evidence thus hope the inquiry’s recommendations go beyond purely operational and administrative improvements to search-and-rescue, to address the fundamental role that UK, France and European border policies play in why more people are dying in the Channel, despite the improvements to search-and-rescue strategies and resources.
Above all, they ask why only some people are able to travel to the UK in comfort and safety while others must make the journey in precarious, overcrowded inflatable dinghies – and thus entrust their lives to the search-and-rescue services whose success can never be guaranteed. As Halima Mohammed Shikh’s cousin, Ali Areef, told the inquiry:
It makes me feel sick to think about crossing the Channel in a ferry where others including a member of my family lost their lives because there was no other way to cross. I will never take a ferry across the Channel again.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Travis Van Isacker gratefully acknowledges the support of the Economic and Social Research Council
(UK) (Grant Ref: ES/W002639/1).
Maritime folklore has long been shuffled to the margins of nautical history, presented as the quaint, colourful oddities of a former age. Yet this body of beliefs, practices and stories can offer important insights into how seafarers of the 19th century viewed and understood their working environment.
Beneath the dominant histories of European exploration, heroic naval battles and imperial claims to mastery of the seas, there was the daily reality of working, living and, not uncommonly, dying in a dangerous marine environment.
This folklore – which was exchanged between multinational crews of mariners and carried across the oceans – provides a way into appreciating their everyday fears, longings and hopes. It reveals a rich emotional and psychological engagement with the ocean, a history of sea fearing that does not sit easily with the stereotypical macho image of mariners.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Much of maritime folklore spoke to anxieties about the temperamental ocean and storms, which boiled down to a fear of disaster and drowning.
To protect themselves from such a fate, 18th- and 19th-century sailors went to sea armoured with magical charms. A popular one was a caul. It was believed owning a caul – the membrane that protects a baby in the womb – would protect a seafarer from drowning.
Such items were openly sold in newspaper advertisements in the 19th century. Three advertised in the Liverpool Mercury in 1873 were priced from 30 shillings to four guineas, no small amount for a common mariner to pay for an idle “superstition”.
Nineteenth-century sailors and fishermen also developed a rich system of omens and predictions. They were attentive to their behaviour and even words (“pig” and “rabbit” being among the worst) that might provoke the ocean or attract bad luck.
Life in the Ocean Representing the Usual Occupations of the Young Officers in the Steerage of a British Frigate at Sea by Augustus Earle (1836). National Maritime Museum
One such example was whistling aboard ships, which was believed to stir winds or gales. The idea that the temperamental winds could be provoked by the smallest actions of the tiny human beings who passed over the ocean’s surface spoke to both mariners’ vulnerability at sea, but also a sense of personal responsibility for the good or bad fortune of their voyage.
That concerns about death haunted seafarers is also seen in a superstitious reluctance to have coffins, dead bodies or clergymen (associated with funerals) aboard ship. As the author and critic William Jones wrote in Credulities Past and Present (1880), the sailor who was fearless in battle or in the face of physical danger, often “shrinks with indescribable apprehension … at the sight of a coffin”.
This was reinforced by maritime ghost stories. Numerous tales of ghost ships, most famously The Flying Dutchman, served as a reminder of the haunting prospect of death at sea.
In telling stories of those who had been lost, seafarers could also express concerns about their present circumstances and future travails. Aboard ships, such tales could also serve as reminders of health and safety concerns. Stories about ghostly crew members who had fallen from the rigging or been washed overboard served as cautionary tales.
The decline and return of maritime folklore
Nineteenth-century critics of mariners’ “superstitions” attempted to debunk their ideas. They pushed the idea that this body of folklore was fading out with the transition from sail to steam power.
No longer reliant on the winds, the steamship symbolised a more rational, mechanical world that had no time for the supernatural whimsy of the age of sail. Yet, indicating its ongoing importance as a way of addressing seafarers fears and concerns, such ideas did not simply disappear. Rather they adapted to the modern world.
The Shipwreck by Joseph Mallord William Turner (1805). Tate
While the price of cauls had dropped in the late 19th century, suggesting declining belief in their protective power, there was a sudden revival in their trade when submarine warfare became a feature of the first world war. Accounts of ghost ships were updated to include steam and later diesel vessels in the 20th century.
Maritime folklore history reminds us that our proclaimed “mastery of the waves” has always been built on rhetoric as much as reality.
In an age of mounting concern about our relationship with the oceans, in which we are having to radically reassess our control over and influence on the natural world, it is perhaps time for this history to resurface.
This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.
Karl Bell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The House of Lords this week approved government legislation that will allow foreign states to hold up to a 15% stake in British newspaper publishers.
This vote clears the way for the American investment company Redbird to take control of the troubled Telegraph newspaper group following two years of uncertainty. An integral element of that bid is a 15% stake by the sovereign investment fund IMI which is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the vice-president of the United Arab Emirates.
The heated Lords debate raised fundamental questions about who should own newspapers, and the link between ownership and editorial content. On one side were those who argued that Britain’s newspapers faced an “existential threat” without outside investment. On the other were those who warned against the potential influence of a foreign power on one of the UK’s longest standing publishers.
Media mergers and acquisitions are often contentious. But given the parlous state of the newspaper industry, they are likely to become more frequent.
A very different kind of newspaper deal was completed last December, when news website Tortoise Media bought The Observer. Tortoise, which was founded in 2018 by former Times editor and BBC director of news James Harding, startled analysts and journalists alike by taking over a newspaper first published in 1791.
The deal prompted strong opposition from some Observer and Guardian journalists. But from a business perspective, the deal suited both sides.
The Scott Trust, owners of the Observer since 1993, never seemed wholly committed to the Observer. (There was, for example, no dedicated Observer website). Tortoise, meanwhile, was keen to exploit the brand values of an established print product. It saw the Observer as a suitable vehicle for its approach of news analysis and explanation rather than breaking stories.
The media world has also been fixated on the succession story of the Murdoch family and its implications for his UK newspapers. The Sun, News of the World (until its closure in 2011), the Times and Sunday Times have been the bedrock of Rupert Murdoch’s economic and political power in the UK for decades.
In December, he lost the battle to give his eldest son Lachlan exclusive control of his media empire.
Speculation has grown as to whether any of Rupert’s progeny will want to continue the family’s print tradition after his death. His empire has suffered repeated financial and reputational hits since the phone hacking scandal. It is perfectly feasible that, once he goes, all the Murdoch press interests will be up for sale.
These various battles beg the question: why does it matter who owns a newspaper? In short, it matters because ownership, to a large extent, determines content.
Who owns the news?
From the very beginning of printed news, proprietors have exercised control over their title’s political direction and journalistic values. Prewar Britain saw Lord Beaverbrook famously exploiting his Express newspapers to campaign for free trade within the British empire.
Meanwhile, fellow newspaper baron Lord Rothermere turned his Mail newspapers into propaganda sheets for Oswald Mosley’s blackshirts, and cheerleaders for Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini during the 1930s.
The Rothermere family’s continued ownership of the Mail has guaranteed a consistent anti-immigration, anti-Europe rightwing worldview to the present day. How this consistent framing has been transmitted through the Mail’s editors has been well documented by journalist Adrian Addison.
Murdoch’s UK newspaper empire has also pursued his personal free market, anti-EU political vision. He has used his papers to attack the publicly funded BBC and the regulator Ofcom. Murdoch has, however, been slightly more flexible in adjusting his papers’ party political allegiance (guaranteeing a succession of prime ministerial genuflections from Margaret Thatcher through to Keir Starmer).
At the other end of the political spectrum, the Scott Trust – owners of the Guardian – was conceived by the son of C.P. Scott as a vehicle for sustaining his father’s liberal mission for the paper. It has a policy of no editorial interference, apart from continuing the paper’s editorial policy on “the same lines and in the same spirit as heretofore”. Editors are therefore enjoined to focus on the kind of progressive news agenda championed by Scott.
The trust model allows a level of freedom from traditional commercial oversight. Editors can pursue the Guardian’s well-established liberal tradition without worrying about shareholders driven by short-term profit maximisation, or an individual owner with a specific ideological agenda. This partly explains the hostility of Observer journalists to the Tortoise takeover.
Why it matters
The Lords debate focused on the risks of foreign state investment in British newspapers. But all commercial ownership models – and all owners – have their problems. Whether it be greedy shareholders, a power-hungry narcissist, an ideologically-driven family or a foreign state seeking influence in the UK, commercial models all involve editorial compromises.
One approach to the problems raised by commercial ownership is an insistence, through legislation, on a plurality of owners. But this is increasingly difficult in an industry whose traditional advertising-funded business model is under severe pressure. This context is precisely why the Telegraph’s new owner was desperate to access IMI funds.
Upmarket publications such as the Financial Times and the Times can monetise subscriptions, but paywalls discourage easy access and diminish journalistic reach. Subscriptions are also a much less attractive proposition for tabloids whose readers are less willing to pay.
Another approach is to diversify ownership models. Non-profit and charitable publishers, such as OpenDemocracy or the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, can leverage donations and are less vulnerable to the whims of corporate owners or powerful individuals. But this model is much less developed in the UK than the US.
I and colleagues have argued elsewhere that there are strong arguments for making charitable journalism easier. These models can enhance journalistic freedom, but they also come with potential downsides that need to be acknowledged.
All these options presuppose, of course, that newspapers and their online sites still have sufficient relevance and reach for us to continue to worry about ownership at all – a topic for another article.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Steven Barnett is on the management and editorial boards of the British Journalism Review. He is a member of the British Broadcasting Challenge which campaigns for Public Service Broadcasting. He is on the Advisory Board of the Charitable Journalism Project which campaigns for public interest journalism and on the board of Hacked Off which campaigns for a free and accountable press.
Briefing the Security Council on Thursday, Khaled Khiari, Assistant Secretary-General for the Middle East, said the OIC remains an “indispensable” partner in efforts to promote peace, uphold international law and deliver durable political solutions in a range of crisis contexts.
Headquartered in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the OIC has 57 member states and five observers, representing significant political, economic cultural and religious constituency.
“Its voice carries considerable weight in some of the world’s conflict-affected situations,” Mr. Khiari said.
“The UN values this partnership, not only as a matter of institutional cooperation, but as an essential component of our efforts to promote durable peace, inclusive governance and respect for international and human rights law.”
He emphasized that the cooperation aligns with Chapter VIII of the UN Charter, which encourages partnerships with regional organizations in maintaining peace and security, and with the Pact for the Future – adopted by Member States last September to revitalize multilateralism and tackle global challenges through collective action.
Helping resolve crises
Mr. Khiari outlined joint UN-OIC work in Gaza, including the recent endorsement by the bloc and the League of Arab States of a recovery and reconstruction plan, as well as collaboration on the question of Jerusalem through an annual conference held in Dakar, Senegal.
In Sudan, where over two years of war have brought devastating humanitarian consequences, he welcomed the OIC’s backing for international mediation, including support for the UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, Ramtane Lamamra.
Turning to Afghanistan, Mr. Khiari praised the OIC’s role in the UN-led “Doha Process,” noting its continued engagement with the Taliban de facto authorities and advocacy for the rights of Afghan women and girls – an area where the OIC’s moral and religious standing carries particular influence.
On Myanmar, the OIC remains an essential voice in global efforts to ensure a safe, dignified and voluntary return of the Rohingya to Rakhine state. He noted sustained coordination between the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy and the OIC in pushing for accountability and citizenship rights.
UN Photo/Manuel Elías
A wideview of the Security Council as ASG Khaled Khiari briefs members about cooperation between the UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
Cooperation on global issues
Assistant Secretary-General Khiari also highlighted the growing collaboration between the two organizations on elections, including training on observation and women’s political participation. A new staff exchange programme is also helping to strengthen institutional ties.
He acknowledged the OIC’s leadership in countering Islamophobia and all forms of religious intolerance, an area where the UN has stepped up efforts, including through the appointment of a Special Envoy.
Counter-terrorism cooperation has also advanced, following a March 2024 memorandum of understanding. Joint initiatives include technical support, parliamentary engagement, and rights-based prevention strategies.
“As we move forward with the implementation of the Pact for the Future,” Mr. Khiari concluded, “the UN-OIC partnership will remain critical to defusing tensions, advancing sustainable peace, and reinforcing multilateral norms and principles.”
Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General for the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) said that is what one of its workers told him on Thursday morning.
This sobering comment comes amidst increasingly severe malnutrition for children and adults throughout the Gaza Strip.
“When child malnutrition surges, coping mechanisms fail, access to food and care disappears, famine silently begins to unfold,” Mr. Lazzarini said in a tweet.
Bombs are not the only thing that kills
Gaza has faced relentless bombardment for almost three years, but Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) said at a briefing on Wednesday that it is not just the bombs which are killing Palestinians.
Starvation is “another killer.”
Reportedly, at least 100 people have died from hunger, and WHO has documented at least 21 cases of children under the age of five dying from malnutrition.
Additionally, Mr. Lazzarini said one in five children in Gaza City are malnourished, a number that is increasing every day that unhindered humanitarian aid is denied. He said that these children urgently need treatment, but supplies remain low.
Between early March and mid-May — 80 consecutive days — no aid was allowed into the Gaza Strip, pushing the population to the brink of famine. While minimal aid has since entered, Tedros emphasised that it is not enough.
“Food deliveries have resumed intermittently but remain far below what is needed for the survival of the population,” he said.
A boy in Gaza waits for food.
Safe havens are no longer safe
Tedros reported that between 27 May and 21 July, over 1,000 people in Gaza have been killed while trying to access food.
Many of these have died in or around sites operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an American-run and Israeli-backed aid distribution organization which the UN has repeatedly said violates well-established principles of international humanitarian law.
“Parents tell us their children cry themselves to sleep from hunger. Food distribution sites have become places of violence,” Tedros said.
In addition to risking their lives when seeking out desperately needed humanitarian assistance, hospitals — which have been systematically targeted according to UNFPA — are no longer safe havens.
“Hospitals, which are supposed to be safe havens, have regularly been attacked, and many are no longer functioning,” Tedros said.
He recalled that on Monday, a WHO staff residence, a humanitarian site, was attacked with male personnel being stripped and interrogated, women and children forced to flee on foot in the midst of violence, and one WHO staff member detained.
“Despite this, WHO and other UN agencies are staying in Gaza. Our commitment is firm. UN agencies must be protected while operating in conflict zones,” Tedros said.
An UNRWA school turned shelter in Al Bureij, Gaza, lies in ruins following a missile attack in May 2025.
Frontline workers face hunger
In addition to the Palestinians in Gaza who are “emaciated, weak and at high risk of dying,” aid workers are also feeling the effects of sustained lack of supplies.
Most UNRWA workers are surviving on a meagre bowl of lentils each day, Mr. Lazzarini said, leading many of them to faint from hunger at work.
“When caretakers cannot find enough to eat, the entire humanitarian system is collapsing,” he said.
Some parents are too hungry to care for their children, and even those who do reach clinics for treatment are often too tired to follow the advice provided.
Mr. Lazzarini noted that UNRWA alone has 6,000 trucks of desperately needed food and medical supplies in Jordan and Egypt. He called for this, and other aid, to be immediately let through.
“Families are no longer coping, they are breaking down, unable to survive. Their existence is threatened,” he said. “Allow humanitarian partners to bring unrestricted and uninterrupted humanitarian assistance to Gaza.”
egistration is now open for the 2025 Oregon Women Veterans Conference, the state’s largest gathering dedicated to honoring and supporting women who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces. The biennial event, hosted by the Oregon Department of Veterans’ Affairs, will bring together women veterans from across Oregon for a weekend of connection, resources and recognition.
The event is free and open to all women veterans, but registration is required. The 2025 Oregon Women Veterans Conference is being held on Saturday, September 27, 2025, at the Riverhouse Lodge in Bend, which was the planned location of the 2020 event that was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“This year’s theme, ‘Stronger Together: Community and Connection,’ reflects the heart of what this conference is all about,” said Dr. Nakeia Council Daniels, director of the Oregon Department of Veterans’ Affairs. “Women veterans have long served with distinction, strength and resilience — often in the face of tremendous challenges and barriers.
“This conference is an opportunity to honor our service, share our stories, and ensure every woman who has worn the uniform feels seen, valued and supported. We are stronger when we stand together, and united, we will continue to drive the ODVA mission forward.”
The Oregon Women Veterans Conference began nearly 30 years ago as a grassroots effort by a small group of women veterans seeking connection, support, and resources. Since the first event in 1998, the conference has grown into a unique statewide gathering that brings together women veterans from across Oregon to access benefits, build meaningful connections, and amplify their voices.
The 2025 conference will continue that legacy with inspiring keynote speakers, engaging workshops, fantastic networking opportunities and assistance for women veterans connecting to the full range of benefits and resources they have earned. It is a supportive space where women who have served can connect, grow, and thrive beyond their military service.
This year’s keynote speaker is Erin McMahon, director of the Oregon Department of Emergency Management and a retired U.S. Army brigadier general, attorney and combat veteran. During her 24-year career in the U.S. Army, McMahon served as the principal deputy general counsel for the National Guard Bureau, advising senior leaders through a wide variety of domestic disaster responses and serving as the first female Army National Guard general officer in the Office of the General Counsel.
Registration is free and may be completed online at www.eventbrite.com/e/odva-women-veterans-conference-tickets-1407725487829. Generous support from Oregon Lottery and other sponsors help ensure this conference is open to all women veterans free of charge.
Registration for the Women Veterans Conference covers the event only; attendees are expected to make their own lodging and travel arrangements. More information about the Women Veterans Conference, including local lodging, donations and sponsorship opportunities, can be found online at wvc.oregondva.com.
On Monday, July 28, the Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT) will reduce traffic to one lane on the bridge that carries Eddy Street over I-95. An alternating traffic pattern both north and southbound will be in place indefinitely as work on this bridge begins and continues. The Eddy Street Bridge is rated as structurally deficient.
This change is part of the I-95 15 Bridges project which will remove 15 bridges from the state’s backlog of poor and fair-to-poor condition bridges along I-95 and Route 10 between Providence and Warwick. Nine of these bridges are structurally deficient. Three are rated among the top five most-traveled, structurally deficient bridges in Rhode Island.
All construction projects are subject to changes in schedule and scope depending on needs, circumstances, findings and weather.
This project is made possible by RhodeWorks. Learn more at www.ridot.net/RhodeWorks.
DALLAS, July 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Mark Cuban Foundation today announced significant updates and a nationwide expansion of its free AI Bootcamps, designed to bring advanced artificial intelligence education to underserved high school students and educators. The program will operate in 29 cities across the U.S. this fall, reinforcing the foundation’s commitment to closing the digital divide and nurturing future innovators.
Applications are now open for high school students (grades 9–12) and educators interested in the Teacher Bootcamp, a year-long, free professional development initiative. The AI Bootcamps are open to all high school students, and prioritize accepting girls, students of color, first-generation college-goers, and students from low-income backgrounds. Applications will be accepted through September 30, 2025.
“As AI becomes an integral part of daily life, it’s essential that all young people have access to this powerful technology,” said Mark Cuban, Founder of the Mark Cuban Foundation. “Our goal is to ensure that every interested student, regardless of background or resources, can explore AI and its limitless possibilities.”
The updated curriculum includes hands-on experience with generative AI tools, modules on ethical AI, and specialized tracks covering healthcare, arts and entertainment, business and entrepreneurship, computer science, sports science, and future readiness. Participants will complete capstone projects under mentorship from industry professionals. Additionally, each location will now have a dedicated Teacher Fellow to further enhance educational outcomes and community involvement. Applications for the Teacher Fellowship program open in January.
All student bootcamps will take place over three Saturdays (November 1, 8, and 15, 2025, from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.), with meals, transportation assistance, and technology provided at no cost.
Charlotte Dungan, Chief Learning Officer at the Mark Cuban Foundation, emphasized, “By equipping underserved students and educators with practical AI skills and ethical insights, we’re actively working toward equity in education and preparing young people for the future.”
Confirmed 2025 Bootcamp Locations:
Arizona: Tempe
California: Mountain View
Colorado: Denver
Connecticut: Hartford
Florida: Melbourne, Miami
Georgia: Atlanta
Illinois: Chicago
Indiana: Fort Wayne, Indianapolis
Iowa: Johnston (Des Moines area)
Kansas: Hutchinson
Michigan: Pontiac
Minnesota: Minneapolis
Missouri: St. Louis
Nebraska: Omaha
New York: New York City
North Carolina: Charlotte, Raleigh
Ohio: Cleveland
Pennsylvania: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh
Rhode Island: Providence
Texas: Houston, Richardson, San Antonio, Plano
Utah: Salt Lake City
Virginia: Richmond
Key local partnerships include Girls Inc. in San Antonio, Miami Dade College in Florida, Electric Works in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and Perficient in St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Plano, TX.
Since 2019, the Mark Cuban Foundation AI Bootcamp has successfully provided AI education to thousands of students in over 30 cities nationwide. The Teacher Fellowship, which began in March 2025 and runs through May 2026, supports 30 selected educators with stipends, mentorship, and national opportunities to showcase their achievements. Teacher Bootcamps have participants in 48 states and impact over 100,000 students.
Interested students and educators can apply for bootcamps now at markcubanai.org.
Companies interested in hosting a future bootcamp can complete our interest form.
Watch Mark Cuban’s message about Mark Cuban Foundation’s AI bootcamps and access the full media kit here.
This bootcamp is facilitated with support from Mark Cuban Foundation AI Bootcamp Program’s media partner, Notified, a globally trusted technology partner for investor relations, public relations and marketing professionals.
About Mark Cuban Foundation’s AI Bootcamp Initiative The Mark Cuban Foundation is a 501(c)(3) private non-profit led by entrepreneur and investor Mark Cuban. The AI Bootcamps Program at MCF seeks to inspire young people with emerging technology so that they can create more equitable futures for themselves and their communities. Over 3 consecutive Saturdays, underserved 9th – 12th grade students learn what AI is and isn’t, where they already interact with AI in their own lives, the ethical implications of AI systems, and much more. Learn more about the no-cost AI Bootcamp program at markcubanai.org.
Affluenz Magazine (www.TheAffluenz.com) has announced the appointment of Anna Ochigbo as its new Creative Director, marking a significant step in the evolution of the globally recognized publication as it deepens its editorial presence and expands its influence across luxury, leadership, and culture.
Ochigbo, who also serves as Executive Director at Dotmount Communications, the Washington DC based parent company of Affluenz, brings to the role a distinguished background in media strategy, creative leadership, and brand development. Her appointment follows the successful release of the magazine’s July and August 2025 issue, which pays tribute to the legacy of the founding father of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, while profiling some of Africa’s most influential cultural and business leaders.
In her new role, Ochigbo will direct the magazine’s overall visual and editorial identity. Her responsibilities include curating covers, guiding cross platform storytelling, and ensuring each edition reflects Affluenz’s core mission of showcasing global excellence, innovation, and influence.
Adedotun Olaoluwa, Founder and Executive Publisher of Affluenz Magazine, described her appointment as both timely and transformative.
Anna possesses a rare creative intuition and an unmatched ability to craft visual narratives that resonate globally. Her leadership comes at a crucial moment as we reimagine Affluenz for a more interconnected, sophisticated, and culturally dynamic audience, Olaoluwa said.
Beyond her achievements in luxury publishing, Ochigbo played a central role in coordinating Dotmount Communications’ flagship event, the Middle East Investors Expo held in 2024, which convened investors, policymakers, and innovators from across the Middle East and Africa. Under her leadership, the event received global media attention and positioned Dotmount as a trusted platform for strategic investment communications.
Ochigbo is also deeply committed to humanitarian work. She plays a leading role in supporting the Hoplites African Aid Foundation (HAAF), a vibrant nonprofit organization dedicated to uplifting communities across Africa through a multifaceted approach that goes beyond traditional health interventions. Originally established in April 2021 as the Hoplites Sickle Cell Foundation, HAAF has since evolved into a broader movement championing sustainable healthcare access, inclusive education, and community development for underserved populations.
Her portfolio extends to international campaigns in culture, philanthropy, and executive branding, where she has earned recognition for fusing luxury aesthetics with meaningful, high impact content.
In a statement following her appointment, Ochigbo shared her excitement about shaping the creative future of the magazine.
Affluenz is more than a magazine. It is a celebration of legacy, innovation, and global identity. I am honored to lead its creative direction at a time when storytelling must be both beautiful and bold. We will not just reflect excellence, we will help define it, she said.
Her first issue as Creative Director is now on sale, featuring a curated selection of in depth profiles, essays, and visual stories that highlight global influence across business, diplomacy, culture, and philanthropy.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of The Affluenz (formerly Pleasures Magazine).
Sonatel’s Board of Directors today announced the appointment of Mr. Brelotte BA as Chief Executive Officer of the Sonatel Group.
Mr. Brelotte BA will succeed Mr. Sékou DRAME whose mandate ends on July 31, 2025.
The Board of Directors of Sonatel thanked Mr. Sékou DRAME for his commitment, his appreciable contributions to the development of the company since his appointment in 2018 as Chief Executive Officer.
Mr. Brelotte BA, who will take up his position on August 1st, 2025, has 24 years of professional experience in the telecommunications sector. He was, since 2022, Deputy Managing Director of Orange Middle East Africa. He has spent most of his professional career within the Sonatel Group where he held important positions, notably:
Management Controller of the Sonatel group (2003 – 2007)
Director of Commercial Marketing and Communications for Orange Guinea (2007-2008),
General Manager of Orange Bissau (2008-2011),
Director of Operators and International Relations at Sonatel (2011-2012),
General Manager of Orange Guinea (2017-2018),
General Manager of Orange Mali (2018-2022).
Mr. Brelotte BA also held the position of Managing Director of Orange Niger (2012-2017).
Mr. Brelotte BA is a graduate engineer from the Ecole Polytechnique de Paris, and the Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées.
The Board of Directors congratulates Mr. Brelotte BA on his appointment and wishes him every success in his new tasks.
He will be able to count on the support of the Board of Directors for Sonatel to maintain its leadership and remain a key player in the development of the digital economy and digital transformation in Africa.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Orange Middle East and Africa.
Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer
Advances additional provision to enhance roadway safety
Today, U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, announced she advanced over $60 million in funding to support critical infrastructure projects and firefighting capabilities across Nebraska.
The funding was included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations Act, which now awaits consideration on the Senate Floor.“From roads and bridges to railways and airports — our infrastructure keeps Nebraska’s communities connected. It allows our farmers and ranchers to bring their goods to market and enables us to travel to work or school. By investing in infrastructure, we are investing in our future. I’m proud to advance these critical investments which will improve our state’s infrastructure for Nebraska’s families and make our Good Life even better,” Fischer said.Fischer advanced funding to support critical investments in Nebraska’s infrastructure:
$6 million to the Alliance Airport for electrical improvements
$6 million to add safety enhancements to the Heartland Expressway
$5.2 million to replace the Lisco Bridge in Garden County
$5 million to extend the runway and parallel taxiway at the Blair Airport
$4.7 million to pave a 4-mile stretch of Hickory Road in Gage County
$4 million to road improvements for Fairbury Highway 36
$4 million to improve the lighting system at the Hastings Airport
$3.5 million to improve walkability and safety of downtown Omaha
$3.4 million to complete the parallel taxiway and improve the lighting system at the Nebraska City Airport
$3.4 million to make improvements to roads in Sheridan and Garden County
$3.2 million to make roadway improvements on Cedar River Road in Garfield County
$2.2 million to reconstruct the 9th street roadway in Stromsburg
$897,000 to replace or repair multiple bridges in Brown County
$880,000 to pave the Adams Bypass
$700,000 to pave the roadway and improve access to the local grain elevator in Exeter
$600,000 to relocate the Midfield Connector Taxiway at Brenner Field Airport in Falls City
Fischer advanced funding to support Nebraska’s firefighting capabilities:
$2.5 million to replace South Sioux City’s aerial ladder fire truck
$1.8 million to replace Plattsmouth’s aerial ladder fire truck
$1.3 million to upgrade Friend’s fire hall facilities
$1.3 million to upgrade Clatonia’s fire hall facilities
Fischer advanced key provision to enhance roadway safety:
Advanced language from Fischer’s She DRIVES Act by directing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to adopt the most advanced crash test dummies.
The review board is the federal agency that was set up 1987 to ensure that the prices for patented drugs are not “excessive.”
Comparing prices
Up until now, one of the criteria the PMPRB used in making the decision about what was an excessive price was to compare the proposed Canadian price for a new drug with the median price in 11 other countries. The median is the 50 per cent mark; in other words, the price in half of the other countries was below what’s proposed for Canada, and the price in the other half was above the proposed Canadian price. Under the new guidelines, set to take effect on Jan. 1, 2026, the Canadian price can be up to the highest in those other 11 countries.
Right now, the median price in the 11 countries Canada is compared to is 15 per cent below the price of patented drugs in Canada. The highest international price, which will be the new standard, is 21 per cent above the median Canadian price, meaning Canadian prices for new drugs will be significantly higher than they otherwise would have been.
Sometimes a drug is not available in any of the 11 other countries when it comes onto the Canadian market. In that case, the company can price the drug at whatever level it wants and keep it at that price until it comes up for its annual price review. The executive director of the PMPRB told the Globe and Mail that this would incentivize drugmakers to bring their products to the Canadian market first.
Incentivizing drug companies may be a reasonable idea, but that’s not part of the mandate of the PMPRB. As laid out in Section 83 of the Patent Act, its mandate is to ensure drug prices aren’t excessive.
Additional therapeutic value
In the past, one of the factors that the PMPRB took into account in determining if prices were excessive was the additional therapeutic value of a new drug compared to what was already on the market. The lower the value, the lower the price. In this regard, the PMPRB was advised by its Human Drug Advisory Panel, an independent group of experts.
The ranking of new drugs against existing ones was also of significant value to Canadian clinicians. It helped them to decide on the best treatment option for their patients and countered the hype about new drugs that came from the manufacturers.
Since the new guidelines have abandoned looking at therapeutic improvement of new drugs, that leaves only one remaining Canadian source for that type of information, the Therapeutics Letter, a bimonthly publication targeting identified problematic therapeutic issues in a brief, simple and practical manner.
If there is an in-depth review of a new drug’s pricing — a preparatory step to determine whether there should be a formal hearing to investigate if the price is excessive — it is only the manufacturer that is allowed to submit information to the PMPRB. Clinicians who prescribe the drug, patients who take the drug, and organizations and individuals that pay for the drug do not have that same right.
Donald Trump’s on-again, off-again tariffs are already threatening to drive up drug prices and make prescription drugs inaccessible to many Canadians. Higher drug prices will also almost certainly affect Canada’s already limited pharmacare program. Higher prices for new drugs will make an expanded pharmacare plan more expensive and less appealing to the federal government. The new PMPRB guidelines help ensure higher drug prices and no pharmacare expansion.
Between 2022-2025, Joel Lexchin received payments for writing a brief for a legal firm on the role of promotion in generating prescriptions for opioids, for being on a panel about pharmacare and for co-writing an article for a peer-reviewed medical journal on semaglutide. He is a member of the Boards of Canadian Doctors for Medicare and the Canadian Health Coalition. He receives royalties from University of Toronto Press and James Lorimer & Co. Ltd. for books he has written. He has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research in the past.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kevin Kriese, Senior Wildfire and Land Use Analyst, Centre for Global Studies, University of Victoria
As the summer heat intensifies, people across Canada are facing the full brunt of wildfire season. Communities are being evacuated and properties are being destroyed as fires grow in size.
Over the past decade, wildfires in Canada have broken numerous records, including the area burned in the largest single fire in recent history.
More frequent fires are unsettling communities, causing rapid changes to ecosystems and having a negative impact on society and our economy.
Increased wildfire risk is driven by a variety of factors, including more extreme fire weather (high temperatures, low humidity and powerful winds) made worse by climate change, fire deficits, the accumulation of fuels like trees and other organic materials on the landscape and changing land-use and settlement patterns.
Fire is a natural, necessary and inevitable part of many ecosystems in Canada. Historically, wildfire created a mosaic of diverse ecosystems and habitat conditions, which supported healthy watersheds and contributed to the cultures and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples.
Beneficial fire typically includes Indigenous cultural burning, prescribed fire and managed wildfire. These fires are managed for their ecological, cultural and community benefits, while minimizing adverse effects.
One reason we’re seeing more catastrophic fires now is because of a history of widespread wildfire suppression, which can allow fuels to accumulate. When fuels accumulate, the risk from wildfire increases.
In certain places and contexts, suppression remains the appropriate approach. It will continue to play a critical role in keeping communities safe and conserving ecosystem services like clean water and special places. But suppression alone is not viable or desirable. Instead, a suite of proactive actions from a variety of stakeholders is required.
In British Columbia, Indigenous communities are returning cultural burning to their territories. A burn by the ʔaq̓am First Nation, with support from the BC Wildfire Service and local fire departments, was credited with helping save lives and homes from the St. Mary’s wildfire in summer 2024.
Later in 2024, portions of a wildfire near the Wet’suwet’en community of Witset were allowed to burn while firefighting efforts focused on the part of the fire that threatened the community. This approach protected the village of Witset while still allowing the fire to create ecological benefits.
Despite increasing awareness that some fires are beneficial, community opposition to cultural and prescribed fires — as well as to letting wildfires burn — persists. This opposition stems from a longstanding fears of fire and the very real threats posed to communities, people and property.
A whole-of-society approach
Until people feel safe from wildfire, the ability to return fire to the landscape will be limited and pressure for maximum suppression will likely continue. However, when people feel safe in their homes and communities, they may be more likely to accept more beneficial fire on the landscape.
Risk reduction programs, such as FireSmart, take a holistic approach to wildfire resilience and include practical measures proven to reduce property loss.
Homeowners who live near fire-prone ecosystems (referred to as the wildland-urban interface) can take simple actions, such as removing flammable material within 1.5 metres of buildings, while communities can plan effective evacuation routes.
Experience in other jurisdictions indicates that voluntary measures, like FireSmart, are more effective when combined with mandatory minimum standards for fire-resistant building construction, vegetation management and landscaping.
Reducing risk and increasing beneficial fires requires co-ordinated action from a diverse array of parties. For example, creating home-hardening requirements demands updated provincial building codes and local government plans that consider wildfire resilience.
When a diverse array of entities is required to work towards a common goal, co-ordination and collaboration are vital and a whole-of-society approach is required. This type of approach fosters innovation, local agency and broader accountability — ultimately resulting in better outcomes on the ground.
Crown governments have historically worked in a top-down wildfire management model: provincial and territorial governments are in charge and select partners, such as industry, have been engaged to carry out specific actions.
As Canadians face another intense wildfire season, in which we’ve already experienced loss of life and property, meaningful action across all of society is essential.
Provincial governments must work in collaboration with Indigenous, local and federal governments, as well as industry, civil society, practitioners, local experts and communities.
Individuals can take action to reduce the risk to their homes by managing the vegetation around their homes and using more fire-resistant building materials. Communities can engage in risk reduction and resilience planning. And governments at all levels can facilitate changes in how we manage our landscape to increase beneficial fires.
Taken together, these diverse actions across all of society will be crucial for protecting people and ecosystems as we all learn to live with fire.
Kevin Kriese is a member of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Andrea Barnett receives funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
Oliver Brandes receives funding from Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the BC Real Estate Foundation.
Prince Rupert, British Columbia – On the Pacific Coast, the rockfish fishery is managed carefully to ensure the long-term sustainability of 37 species caught in British Columbia’s marine waters. Rockfish are extremely susceptible to over-fishing due to their slow growth rates, low reproductive cycle and high-mortality when brought to the surface. As a result, all rockfish species caught in the commercial groundfish trawl fishery must be retained, accurately recorded, and reported to ensure that fishers do not exceed their quota.
On July 9, 2025, in Prince Rupert provincial court, Roger Atchison, onboard captain and co-owner of the commercial fishing vessel Savage Eagle, pled guilty to multiple violations of Canada’s Fisheries Act. Mr. Atchison released over 9,000 pounds of rockfish and failed to keep accurate and complete records of his fishing activities. These actions are violations of the conditions of his licence and occurred between October 18 and October 23, 2023, after his vessel left Prince Rupert to engage in commercial fishing in the Hecate Strait.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) protects and conserves marine resources, and enforces the Fisheries Act. As part of DFO’s work to disrupt and prevent illegal activity, the Department asks the public for information on activities of this nature or any contravention of the Fisheries Act and regulations. Anyone with information can call DFO Pacific Region’s toll-free violation reporting line at 1-800-465-4336, or email the details to DFO.ORR-ONS.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca.
“As a long-time registered nurse who has spent years on the front lines of health care, I’ve seen how critical it is for patients to receive care close to home, especially when facing something as life-altering as cancer. The Kamloops BC Cancer centre is more than just a building; it’s an investment in the lives, strength and dignity of patients and their families. It means fewer long, exhausting trips away from loved ones, and more moments spent in the comfort of home, surrounded by support.”
Sylvia Weir, president and CEO, Interior Health –
“The BC Cancer centre marks a significant advancement in cancer care for the community and surrounding region, and Interior Health is proud to play a key role in making this project a reality. When complete, thousands of patients and families will have access to increased services and support, advanced technology and radiation care closer to home. The expansion of the community oncology network clinic and pharmacy, and an additional MRI will also result in shorter wait times, improved patient care and an enhanced working environment for staff.”
Dr. Paris-Ann Ingledew, interim chief medical officer and executive vice-president, BC Cancer/PHSA –
“Today marks a significant milestone in expanding access to cancer treatment for patients and families in Kamloops and surrounding communities. The new BC Cancer centre at Royal Inland Hospital will be designed to meet the growing demand for cancer care in the future, while upholding our strong commitment to high quality, patient-centred and culturally safe care.”
Sarah Roth, president and chief executive officer, BC Cancer Foundation –
“This is a major step forward in delivering the world-class care BC Cancer is known for to more communities in the Interior. Supported by a BC Cancer Foundation $5-million fundraising campaign, progress on the upcoming BC Cancer centre in Kamloops brings new hope to patients and their families who deserve timely access to treatment without the added burden of travel.”
Brenda Partridge, Kamloops resident and patient –
“As someone who has received life-saving care at BC Cancer, it comforts me to know a new cancer centre is coming to Kamloops. Cancer treatment is exhausting in every way, and having more treatment options close to home will help patients and their families during this difficult journey.”
Mike O’Reilly, chair, Thompson Regional Hospital District –
“So many families are affected by cancer in some way, and for decades, families in the Thompson-Nicola region have had an added burden of travelling many hours for treatment. With three new LINAC machines in Kamloops, our residents will receive radiation treatment much closer to home. Additionally, we congratulate EllisDon on this contract award and look forward to their quality work.”
Heidi Coleman, CEO, Royal Inland Hospital Foundation –
“Behind every cancer diagnosis is a story of strength, fear, resilience and hope. With three new LINAC radiation machines slated for the site, patients in our community can now heal closer to home, surrounded by their loved ones. Congratulations to EllisDon on being awarded the contract. We’re proud to continue working with a team known for delivering excellence in health-care infrastructure.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jim Costa Representing 16th District of California
WASHINGTON – Congressman Jim Costa (CA-21) announced $35.4 million in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to support Head Start and Early Head Start services in Fresno and Tulare counties. These programs provide critical early childhood education, healthcare, and family support services to families across the San Joaquin Valley.“Every child deserves a fair shot, no matter their zip code or family income. I’ve always fought to protect Head Start because it gives kids the tools to succeed,” said Congressman Costa. “This funding means more children will walk into kindergarten ready to learn, and more families will have access to reliable, affordable childcare they can count on.”BACKGROUNDHead Start is a federally funded program administered by HHS that promotes school readiness for children from birth to age five. It provides comprehensive services, including early education, health screenings, nutrition assistance, and parental support to underserved families across the country.Research consistently shows that children who participate in Head Start programs are more likely to start school on track and succeed in later academic settings. As part of its latest funding cycle, HHS awarded the following grants to support local operations:
Fresno County: $23.7 million for the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (EOC) Tulare County: $11.6 million for the Tulare County Office of Education (TCOE)
These grants will support ongoing program operations, staff retention, classroom improvements, and expanded access to services for eligible families in the region.
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services – 3
This recall involves removing devices from where they are used or sold. The FDA has identified this recall as the most serious type. This device may cause serious injury or death if you continue to use it. Affected Product
What to Do Do not use the identified affected products listed in the table above.
On May 16, 2025, Edwards Lifesciences began sending all affected customers a “Field Corrective Action #192” letter recommending the following actions:
Search your inventory for and remove the affected product. Share this notice with appropriate clinical staff at your site. Ensure no patient follow-up or notification is necessary. Work with your Edwards enableCV (eCV) Representative to return affected product and receive a credit. Distributors should notify all customers who have purchased the affected product by sending the customer notification they received.
Reason for Recall Edwards Lifesciences has identified occurrences in which a 3mm to 4mm section of wire, from the wire-reinforcement coil at the cannula tip of the OptiSite Arterial Perfusion Cannula devices, was found to be exposed (released from the cannula body). Since some Femoral Arterial Cannula models are made of the same components as the impacted OptiSite Arterial Perfusion Cannula, Edwards has included those Femoral Arterial Cannula models as affected product to be removed from use. Risks to the patient of using the affected product with exposed wire include major tissue damage, puncturing the artery which could cause bleeding, inadequate perfusion, and hemolysis. As of May 20, 2025, Edwards Lifesciences has not reported any serious injuries or deaths associated with this issue. Device Use The Edwards Lifesciences arterial perfusion cannulae are indicated for adult patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass. They are intended to provide arterial perfusion of oxygenated blood in the extracorporeal circuit for up to six hours. Contact Information Customers in the U.S. with adverse reactions, quality problems, or questions about this recall should contact their Edwards eCV Representative or Edwards Customer Service at FCA_ECV@edwards.com or 888-943-2783. Unique Device Identifier (UDI) The unique device identifier (UDI) helps identify individual medical devices sold in the United States from distribution to use. The UDI allows for more accurate reporting, reviewing, and analyzing of adverse event reports so that devices can be identified more quickly, and as a result, problems potentially resolved more quickly.
How do I report a problem? Health care professionals and consumers may report adverse reactions or quality problems they experienced using these devices to MedWatch: The FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program.
overnor Kathy Hochul today highlighted more momentum for New York’s implementation of distraction-free schools this fall, as approximately 300 school districts statewide have now submitted their plans for bell-to-bell smartphone restrictions in advance of the State’s August 1 deadline. School districts are continuing to share their distraction-free policy with the New York State Education Department (NYSED). As districts finalize their policy in advance of the deadline, they can continue to utilize the resources seen on the Distraction-Free Schools page on Governor Hochul’s website for distraction-free schools, which provides a policy FAQ, external informational toolkit and other resources.
“Our young people succeed when they’re learning and growing, not clicking and scrolling — and that’s why New York will be ready to implement bell-to-bell smartphone restrictions on the first day of school,” Governor Hochul said. “I’m pleased that most school districts across the state have either already implemented or are finalizing their distraction-free policy — and my team continues to provide the resources and tools to ensure school districts publish their policy by the August 1 deadline.”
This new requirement will take place in the 2025-26 School Year and applies to all schools in public school districts, as well as charter schools and Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES).
This month, Governor Hochul has held roundtable discussions with school district administrators, teachers and other stakeholders from New York City and the Capital Region to highlight their plans for implementing bell-to-bell smartphone restrictions when school resumes this fall. With NYC Public Schools being the nation’s largest school system, teachers and administrators, unions, school safety officers and students spoke about their plans for this upcoming school year, alongside New York City Public Schools Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos.
In a conversation with the Governor and Melinda Person, President of New York State United Teachers (NYSUT), Albany City School District, Schenectady City School District, Utica City School District and East Greenbush Central School District shared their highlights as they have finalized their distraction-free policy in advance of the State’s August 1 deadline.
State Senator Shelley B. Mayer said, “I am pleased that approximately 300 school districts across New York have submitted considered, bell-to-bell cell phone restriction plans. The bell-to-bell cell phone restriction and the plans submitted demonstrate a real commitment to creating learning environments that put students’ academic focus and mental well-being first. Importantly, each district has worked to craft a policy that meets the unique needs of their own school community. I commend school leaders, educators, and families for coming together to support students and take meaningful action to reduce distractions and improve outcomes in our classrooms.”
State Senator John Liu said, “This milestone of approximately 300 school districts submitting plans for keeping phones out of school shows that New York schools are moving swiftly to implement distraction-free policies. This rapid momentum puts us on a fast track for a statewide bell-to-bell phone restriction and moves us one step closer to safer, healthier, and academically engaging learning environments.”
Governor Hochul’s cellphone policy creates a statewide standard for distraction-free schools in New York including:
Prohibits unsanctioned use of smartphones and other internet-enabled personal devices on school grounds in K-12 schools for the entire school day (from “bell to bell”), including classroom time and other settings like lunch and study hall periods
Allows schools to develop their own plans for storing smartphones during the day — giving administrators and teachers the flexibility to do what works best for their buildings and students
Secures $13.5 million in funding to be made available for schools that need assistance in purchasing storage solutions to help them go distraction-free
Requires schools to give parents a way to contact their kids during the day when necessary
Requires teachers, parents and students to be consulted in developing the local policy
Prevents inequitable discipline
Governor Hochul’s policy clarifies that students will have authorized access to simple cellphones without internet capability, as well as internet-enabled devices officially provided by their school for classroom instruction, such as laptops or tablets used as part of lesson plans.
Additionally, the Governor’s policy includes several exemptions to smartphone restrictions, including for students who require access to an internet-enabled device to manage a medical condition, where required by a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP), for academic purposes or for other legitimate purposes, such as translation, family caregiving and emergencies.
Governor Hochul pursued this initiative after engaging in a statewide listening tour with teachers, parents, and students. Her report “More Learning, Less Scrolling: Creating Distraction-Free Schools” underscores the following:
Smartphones distract students and inhibit learning and creativity
Phone-free environments do not compromise student safety
Phone-free environments support the mental health of students and teachers
Open communication and direct guidance for all stakeholders is key for successful implementation
Schools must address any parent concerns about staying in contact with their children during the day
An effective distraction-free policy must focus on the entire school day, rather than solely on time in the classroom
Schools can strengthen their distraction-free environment by connecting more students with in-person engagement like clubs, sports, arts and other programming
OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, as part of a coalition of 23 attorneys general and two states, expanded its ongoing legal challenge of the Trump Administration’s attempt to gut AmeriCorps by adding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as a defendant for withholding tens of millions of dollars in funding for critical service programs. In June, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition secured a court order that reinstated hundreds of AmeriCorps programs that were unlawfully cancelled and barred AmeriCorps from making similar cuts without formal rulemaking. Despite this order, OMB is withholding vast sums intended for outstanding service programs, threatening their survival and the wellbeing of those who depend on their services. Because of the Trump Administration’s withholding of these critical resources, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition today filed an amended lawsuit that adds OMB as a defendant and brings new legal claims against the agency.
“AmeriCorps represents the best of who we are, what we can be, as a nation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Last month, I secured a court order stopping the illegal dismantling of AmeriCorps – ensuring these selfless servicemembers can continue to serve our communities while litigation continues. But now, President Trump is trying a different, yet similarly, illegal tactic to withhold funding. We’re going back to court to block this latest maneuver – and we’ll keep fighting to ensure this invaluable program continues.”
AmeriCorps, an independent federal agency that engages Americans in meaningful community-based service, provides opportunities for more than 200,000 Americans to serve their communities every year. AmeriCorps supports national and state community service programs by funding and placing volunteers in local and national organizations that address critical community needs. Organizations rely on support from AmeriCorps to recruit, place, and supervise AmeriCorps members nationwide.
In 2024, more than 6,150 California members served at least 1,200 locations, including schools, food banks, homeless shelters, health clinics, youth centers, veterans’ facilities, and other nonprofit and faith-based organizations. AmeriCorps invested more than $133 million in federal funding to California that same year to support cost-effective community solutions, working with local partners on the ground to help communities tackle their toughest challenges. This includes programs like:
Prevent Child Abuse California, which hosts 65 AmeriCorps members who provide academic assistance, life skills, and financial literacy to hundreds of foster youths across 15 counties.
Partnership for Veterans and People Experiencing Homeless, which hosts 25 AmeriCorps members that provide housing services, job placement, and case management to veterans and homeless individuals in Santa Barbara County.
Reading Partners California, which hosts 80 AmeriCorps members who recruit and manage approximately 1400 volunteers to provide one-on-one literacy tutoring to students at 58 low-income elementary schools.
In the amended complaint, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition allege that OMB has unlawfully withheld from plaintiff states well over $38 million in support intended for specific AmeriCorps programs, across multiple funding streams. For example, OMB appears to have withheld tens of millions of dollars intended for AmeriCorps Senior Companion Programs and Foster Grandparent Programs in plaintiff states, programs that pair low-income seniors with children in need of mentorship and support or with other seniors in need of companionship and care. The Administration has also withheld approximately $5 million intended for plaintiff state service commissions, which was needed to provide training and technical assistance to service members across the country. And while AmeriCorps decided to fund numerous programs in plaintiff states with over $33 million in highly competitive grants for the next service year, OMB is preparing to withhold these funds from distribution as well.
The coalition establishes that the Trump Administration has acted unlawfully in its withholding of AmeriCorps funds, violating both the Administrative Procedure Act and the separation of powers under the U.S. Constitution. Congress created AmeriCorps and appropriated funding to support public service, and neither OMB nor AmeriCorps hold authority to defy Congress by refusing to distribute funds to worthy service programs.
In filing the amended complaint, Attorney General Bonta and the attorneys general of Maryland, Delaware, and Colorado lead the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, as well as the states of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
A copy of the amended complaint is available here.
Societe Generale announces that it has carried out a capital decrease through the cancellation of treasury shares and successfully completed a capital increase as part of the 32nd Global Employee Share Ownership Programme.
Capital decrease through cancellation of treasury shares
On 10 July 2025, the Board of Directors, upon authorization of the Extraordinary General Meeting of 22 May 2024, decided to reduce Societe Generale’s share capital by cancellation of 22,667,515 treasury shares as of 24 July 2025, i.e. 2.8% of the share capital. These shares were repurchased from 10 February to 8 April 2025 included for the purpose of cancellation for an amount of EUR 872 million.
This amount of share buy-back and the amount of the resulting capital decrease have been determined by the Board of Directors in application of the distribution policy to shareholders for the 2024 financial year. This amount was also determined primarily to fully offset, for shareholders not participating in it, the dilutive impact of the capital increase of the 32nd Global Employee Share Ownership Programme.
Capital increase as part of the Global Employee Share Ownership Programme
On 24 July 2025, the Chief Executive Officer, upon authorization of the Extraordinary General Meeting of 22 May 2024, and delegation of the Board of Directors, noted the completion of the capital increase following the 2025 Global Employee Share Ownership Programme. The capital increase amounts to a total of EUR 269,310,884.40 and has resulted in the issuance of 7,531,065 new shares, i.e. 0.97% of the share capital after the share capital decrease carried out as a consequence of the previously mentioned share buy-back or 0.94% of the share capital prior to this decrease.
The positive impact of this capital increase on the CET1 ratio will be around 7 basis points and will be effective in the capital ratio at the end of Q3 25.
Approximately 51,000 Group employees and eligible retired former employees in 31 countries have subscribed to this transaction.
Employee share ownership is a collective programme at Societe Generale to involve employees in the development of the company and to enable them to benefit from long-term value creation.
New amount of share capital
Following these two transactions, the share capital of Societe Generale is EUR 981,475,408.75, divided into 785,180,327 shares with a nominal value of EUR 1.25 each.
Societe Generale is a top tier European Bank with around 119,000 employees serving more than 26 million clients in 62 countries across the world. We have been supporting the development of our economies for 160 years, providing our corporate, institutional, and individual clients with a wide array of value-added advisory and financial solutions. Our long-lasting and trusted relationships with the clients, our cutting-edge expertise, our unique innovation, our ESG capabilities and leading franchises are part of our DNA and serve our most essential objective – to deliver sustainable value creation for all our stakeholders.
The Group runs three complementary sets of businesses, embedding ESG offerings for all its clients:
French Retail, Private Banking and Insurance, with leading retail bank SG and insurance franchise, premium private banking services, and the leading digital bank BoursoBank.
Global Banking and Investor Solutions, a top tier wholesale bank offering tailored-made solutions with distinctive global leadership in equity derivatives, structured finance and ESG.
Mobility, International Retail Banking and Financial Services, comprising well-established universal banks (in Czech Republic, Romania and several African countries), Ayvens (the new ALD I LeasePlan brand), a global player in sustainable mobility, as well as specialized financing activities.
Committed to building together with its clients a better and sustainable future, Societe Generale aims to be a leading partner in the environmental transition and sustainability overall. The Group is included in the principal socially responsible investment indices: DJSI (Europe), FTSE4Good (Global and Europe), Bloomberg Gender-Equality Index, Refinitiv Diversity and Inclusion Index, Euronext Vigeo (Europe and Eurozone), STOXX Global ESG Leaders indexes, and the MSCI Low Carbon Leaders Index (World and Europe).
In case of doubt regarding the authenticity of this press release, please go to the end of the Group News page on societegenerale.com website where official Press Releases sent by Societe Generale can be certified using blockchain technology. A link will allow you to check the document’s legitimacy directly on the web page.
The State of Qatar has reiterated its rejection of the use of food and the starvation of civilians as a weapon of war, calling on the international community to compel Israel to allow the safe, sustained, and unobstructed entry of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, to be distributed by international humanitarian organizations.
This came in a statement delivered by HE Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar to the United Nations Sheikha Alya Ahmed bin Saif Al-Thani during the UN Security Council quarterly open debate on The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question (MEPQ), held at UN Headquarters in New York.
Her Excellency emphasized that the humanitarian situation in Gaza is beyond description, amid widespread famine, the collapse of infrastructure and the healthcare system, the spread of disease, and a death toll surpassing 58,000, including nearly 18,000 children.
She affirmed the State of Qatar strong condemnation of Israel ongoing attacks on civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and residential areas, stressing that the forced displacement of Palestinians in any form constitutes a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.
Her Excellency also stated that Qatar has made sincere efforts, in coordination with Egypt and the United States, to reach a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. She noted that past diplomatic efforts had yielded tangible results through previously reached agreements, and that current mediation efforts are ongoing to bridge the gap between the parties and secure an urgent agreement.
She further condemned the statements made by Israel Minister of Justice regarding the annexation of the West Bank, describing them as a continuation of illegal settlement policies and a flagrant violation of international law and UN Security Council Resolution 2334. She also denounced the approval of new settlement construction and the attacks carried out by settlers as part of an ongoing series of crimes against the unarmed Palestinian population. She called for urgent international action to protect civilians and to ensure accountability for those responsible.
Her Excellency conveyed Qatar condemnation of attempts by the Israeli occupation to alter the religious and historical status of holy sites, including the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque by Israeli officials and settlers, the closure of the Jerusalem Fund, and the transfer of authority over Al Ibrahimi Mosque to a Jewish religious council.
She said Qatar warned of the risks of regional spillover due to the conflict and condemned Israel attacks on Syria, reaffirming its support for the Syrian Arab Republic sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, and the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for stability and development.
She also reaffirmed the State of Qatar’s principled and unwavering support for Lebanon, its unity and territorial integrity, and called for the withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from all Lebanese territory, urging all parties to uphold the ceasefire agreement.
Her Excellency expressed the State of Qatar welcome of the upcoming United Nations High-Level International Conference on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution to be co-chaired next week by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the French Republic. Qatar hopes the conference will yield tangible results and clear international commitments, serving as a foundational step toward full UN membership for the State of Palestine.
Her Excellency concluded by reaffirming Qatar principled and consistent stance in support of a just and sustainable solution to the Palestinian issue, based on international legitimacy and ensuring the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. She stressed that Qatar will spare no effort in facilitating and supporting efforts toward achieving this goal.
The PSA has just filed legal action with the Employment Relations Authority over MBIE’s disregard of existing flexible work arrangements including working from home which are protected under the PSA’s collective agreement with the Government department.
The Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has recently introduced a new Flexible Work Policy to align with the Government’s directive to restrict flexible work arrangements for public service workers including reducing days working from home. This directive is also itselfsubject to legal actionby the PSA.
“Cracking down on flexible work is the wrong approach from employers in 2025,” said Fleur Fitzsimons, National Secretary for the Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi.
“Working from home and flexible work are generally a win-win for employers and employees, that’s why we are asking MBIE to stick with current flexible work arrangements and look for more ways to enable flexibility which we know is particularly valuable for women, people with disabilities and everyone with caring responsibilities.
“The PSA originally raised objections to MBIE’s flexible work guidance in June 2025 and then tried to resolve this dispute through mediation, but this failed. MBIE hasn’t been willing to backdown, leaving the PSA with no choice but to take this step to protect the rights of MBIE staff included in existing agreements.
“The collective agreement binds MBIE to supporting flexible work, so its new policy is simply unlawful. We are seeking a determination from the ERA that MBIE is violating the ‘flexible by default’ approach which forms part of its collective agreement with members.
“Employees at MBIE have a right to flexible work arrangements which suit their individual circumstances unless there is a good business reason not to. Now MBIE is saying working from home and other arrangements must be re-negotiated, their position is that all new arrangements are to be reviewed every six months with the aim of reducing the number of days worked from home.
“MBIE wants to meet individually with employees to tell them they need to make a new flexible work request which will be considered under the more restrictive policy,” said Fitzsimons.
“MBIE can’t just change existing agreements which are protected under the collective.
“This is a backward step, going against all international evidence and tr
Defendant Impersonated Federal Agent, Attorney, and Others to Perpetrate $3.5M Fraud
A Utah man was sentenced yesterday to 108 months in prison for wire fraud, impersonating a federal officer, aggravated identity theft, and making a false statement.
The following is according to court documents and statements made in court: from 2018 through 2020, Santiago Garcia Gutierrez (Garcia), of Salt Lake City, defrauded a single victim out of more than $2.8 million by falsely representing that he was a confidential informant with the Department of Homeland Security. He also falsely represented that he could acquire, at discounted prices, exotic cars, planes, and vessels that had been seized by the U.S. government through forfeiture. Garcia falsely induced the victim to use him as an intermediary to receive the money that the victim believed was then being used to purchase what turned out to be non-existent luxury assets. To convince his victim the scheme was legitimate, Garcia contacted the victim on numerous occasions via text message from multiple phone numbers, falsely claiming to be a confidential government informant, federal agent and, at times, Garcia’s own attorney.
In addition, from 2019 through 2024, Garcia defrauded eight additional victims across the country. To execute these other frauds, Garcia falsely induced victims to invest money into federal oil wells in which he had an ownership interest, promising large returns on investment. The victims never realized any profits, however, because Garcia diverted the investment funds for his own benefit. To effectuate these schemes and lend them legitimacy, Garcia again assumed the identity of his attorney. In total, Garcia defrauded these victims of more than $900,000.
Finally, Garcia did not pay royalties to the federal government on the sale of oil extracted from the wells, despite knowing that he had a duty to do so.
In addition to the term of imprisonment, U.S. District Judge Howard C. Nielson Jr. for the District of Utah ordered Garcia to pay $3,795,930.60 in restitution to the victims of his crimes, and to forfeit $2,853,789.27.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Felice John Viti for the District of Utah, and Special Agent in Charge Carissa Messick of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Phoenix Field Office made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation’s Phoenix Field Office and the EPA investigated the case.
Senior Litigation Counsel Richard M. Rolwing and former Trial Attorney Erika Suhr of the Tax Division prosecuted the case.
Defendant Impersonated Federal Agent, Attorney, and Others to Perpetrate $3.5M Fraud
A Utah man was sentenced yesterday to 108 months in prison for wire fraud, impersonating a federal officer, aggravated identity theft, and making a false statement.
The following is according to court documents and statements made in court: from 2018 through 2020, Santiago Garcia Gutierrez (Garcia), of Salt Lake City, defrauded a single victim out of more than $2.8 million by falsely representing that he was a confidential informant with the Department of Homeland Security. He also falsely represented that he could acquire, at discounted prices, exotic cars, planes, and vessels that had been seized by the U.S. government through forfeiture. Garcia falsely induced the victim to use him as an intermediary to receive the money that the victim believed was then being used to purchase what turned out to be non-existent luxury assets. To convince his victim the scheme was legitimate, Garcia contacted the victim on numerous occasions via text message from multiple phone numbers, falsely claiming to be a confidential government informant, federal agent and, at times, Garcia’s own attorney.
In addition, from 2019 through 2024, Garcia defrauded eight additional victims across the country. To execute these other frauds, Garcia falsely induced victims to invest money into federal oil wells in which he had an ownership interest, promising large returns on investment. The victims never realized any profits, however, because Garcia diverted the investment funds for his own benefit. To effectuate these schemes and lend them legitimacy, Garcia again assumed the identity of his attorney. In total, Garcia defrauded these victims of more than $900,000.
Finally, Garcia did not pay royalties to the federal government on the sale of oil extracted from the wells, despite knowing that he had a duty to do so.
In addition to the term of imprisonment, U.S. District Judge Howard C. Nielson Jr. for the District of Utah ordered Garcia to pay $3,795,930.60 in restitution to the victims of his crimes, and to forfeit $2,853,789.27.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Felice John Viti for the District of Utah, and Special Agent in Charge Carissa Messick of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Phoenix Field Office made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation’s Phoenix Field Office and the EPA investigated the case.
Senior Litigation Counsel Richard M. Rolwing and former Trial Attorney Erika Suhr of the Tax Division prosecuted the case.
New York City, NY, July 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In the evolving landscape of online gaming, Free Spins No Deposit Casino Bonus offers have become a staple for platforms seeking to attract new users. These promotions — which grant free spins or small starting balances without requiring an upfront deposit — are gaining prominence across US-facing online casinos.
For players, such offers represent an opportunity to explore slot titles, test platform features, and potentially win real money, all without committing personal funds at the outset. For operators, they provide a low-friction onboarding method to build trust and drive engagement.
A Free Spins No Deposit Casino Bonus is a new player incentive where a casino grants free spins on selected slot games after account registration. Unlike traditional welcome packages, these offers do not require players to make an initial deposit.
Optional bonus cash, such as $200 no deposit bonus 200 free spins real money, usable for gameplay with withdrawal conditions.
Standard wagering requirements, dictating how many times winnings must be played through before cash-out.
This format enables first-time users to experience casino content and mechanics risk-free, while still offering the potential to earn withdrawable funds under defined terms.
The Appeal for US Players
Low-Risk Exploration
In a competitive US iGaming market, many players remain cautious about depositing money with unfamiliar operators. No deposit casino bonuses offer a compromise — a way to try games, test mobile apps, and evaluate payout processes without financial exposure.
Real Money Potential
Promotions like $100 no deposit bonus 200 free spins real money or $200 no deposit bonus 200 free spins real money extend beyond trial play. While winnings are typically capped and subject to wagering rules, they allow players to build balances that can be withdrawn after meeting requirements.
Slot Variety
These bonuses frequently apply to no deposit slots, allowing users to sample popular or exclusive titles before deciding to commit funds. Many operators use new or trending slot releases as the centerpiece of such offers to showcase their portfolios.
Crypto and Bitcoin Casino Options
With the rise of digital currencies in online gambling, some platforms now extend crypto casino no deposit bonus promotions. These incentives mirror traditional offers but allow users to engage using cryptocurrency wallets instead of fiat accounts.
In parallel, bitcoin casino no deposit bonus packages are attracting interest from tech-savvy players who prefer faster transactions, enhanced privacy, and lower fees. These bonuses may involve free spins or small crypto balances credited upon signup, usable on blockchain-integrated slot titles.
Best Online Casino Real Money No Deposit Offers
The US market is diverse, with several licensed and offshore operators competing for attention. Best online casino real money no deposit offers often stand out by combining:
High free spin counts (100–200 spins).
Small no-deposit cash bonuses ($10–$200).
Flexible wagering rules, allowing players a realistic chance to convert bonus play into withdrawable funds.
While the value of such offers varies, they have become a defining feature in how players evaluate platforms — often influencing sign-up decisions.
Regulatory and Compliance Considerations
In the US, availability of no deposit bonus casino promotions depends on jurisdiction. Fully regulated states like New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia allow licensed platforms to issue such bonuses under local gaming laws. Offshore platforms, meanwhile, operate internationally but must adhere to fair gaming standards and responsible play guidelines to maintain credibility.
Key compliance practices include:
Identity Verification: Confirming player age and location.
Responsible Gaming Tools: Self-exclusion options, deposit limits, and playtime reminders.
Transparency: Clear display of wagering requirements, max withdrawal caps, and eligible games.
How These Bonuses Work in Practice
Here’s how a typical Free Spins No Deposit Casino Bonus functions:
Player registers an account with a participating casino.
The casino grants bonus credits or spins, such as 200 free spins tied to specific titles.
Winnings from these spins are credited as bonus funds, subject to wagering (e.g., 20x).
Players who meet the requirements can withdraw winnings as cash or cryptocurrency.
Some casinos also combine multiple incentives, such as $100 no deposit bonus 200 free spins real money packages, offering both spins and a small cash balance.
The Role of No Deposit Slots
No deposit slots are a central feature of these promotions. Operators typically curate a selection of popular or new titles for these bonuses, including:
High-volatility slots with larger jackpot potential.
Branded or themed titles designed to showcase graphics and bonus mechanics.
Games with accessible betting ranges to extend the value of free spins.
By focusing on slots, casinos create a straightforward, low-barrier entry point for new players, many of whom are engaging with online gaming for the first time.
Why Operators Use These Promotions
From a business perspective, no deposit casino bonuses serve as a powerful marketing tool. They:
Reduce sign-up friction by removing initial payment barriers.
Give players a taste of the platform’s slot selection and interface.
Convert trial users into depositors by building trust and familiarity.
Platforms offering no deposit bonus casino deals also benefit from word-of-mouth marketing, as players often share their experiences — especially when free spins lead to notable wins.
Responsible Gaming and Player Awareness
While these bonuses offer genuine opportunities for risk-free play, responsible gaming remains crucial. Players are advised to:
Review terms carefully, including wagering requirements and withdrawal limits.
Use bonuses as a way to test platforms rather than as a primary income source.
Engage with casinos that are licensed or maintain independent RNG (random number generator) certifications.
For operators, integrating session limits, easy-to-access self-exclusion tools, and clear disclosures helps maintain trust while encouraging sustainable engagement.
The Future of No Deposit Casino Bonuses in the US
Analysts predict that free spins no deposit and related offers will continue to expand as the US online casino market grows. As competition intensifies, players may see:
Larger spin counts (beyond 200) tied to flagship slot launches.
Hybrid incentives, such as crypto casino no deposit bonus options for digital asset users.
Tailored bonuses using AI-driven segmentation to match player preferences with game types.
While regulations will continue to shape availability, these offers are poised to remain a cornerstone of user acquisition strategies in regulated and offshore markets alike.
Conclusion
The rise of Free Spins No Deposit Casino Bonus offers reflects a larger trend in the US online gaming industry: making casino experiences accessible, risk-free, and appealing to a wide audience. Whether through $200 no deposit bonus 200 free spins real money packages, bitcoin casino no deposit bonus options, or simple no deposit slots trials, these promotions provide both players and operators with a mutually beneficial entry point.
As the market continues to mature, expect to see more diverse and innovative approaches to these bonuses — from crypto-integrated rewards to expanded free spin events — ensuring they remain a defining feature of the modern online casino experience.
Two women have today appeared before Jersey’s Royal Court and been sentenced for attempting to import cocaine into the Island, with a street value of £21,000.
Stephanie Louise Dean, aged 42 from Tipton, was sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment, and Jaye Eleanor Henry, aged 28, from Stourbridge, was given a 384-hour community service order.
They arrived in the Island on Wednesday 16 April 2025 having travelled from Portsmouth on the Stena Vinga ferry. When questioned by Jersey Customs and Immigration Officers, the women explained that they were in Jersey for one night, having booked their travel the day before and would be staying at the Savoy Hotel. Dean and Henry stated that they had been driven from Birmingham to Portsmouth to catch the ferry.
During a search of their baggage several swabs were taken which gave positive indications for cocaine with both women admitting to cocaine use the previous weekend. Officers became suspicious that the women were importing drugs internally and they were subsequently arrested. Dean then stated to officers: “I have to come clean; I have got something on me”. She later produced a condom-wrapped package containing 83.74 grams of cocaine with a purity of 84%.
During interview Dean said she was unaware what the package actually contained, thinking it was cannabis, but agreed to import the drugs into Jersey to clear her drugs debt of between £800 and £900, that she owed to a man named “Bubba”.
Henry was found not to be carrying any drugs but stated that the individual who had driven them to Portsmouth had tried to pass her the package which she refused and was given to Dean. She stated that Dean was getting paid £2,000 to import the drugs and that she would receive spending money for travelling with her. Phone messaging indicated that Henry was aware of the package and was to be paid for the importation.
Paul Le Monnier, Senior Manager at Jersey Customs and Immigration Service, said: “Our officers continue to disrupt the importation of controlled drugs at our borders and whilst these two women were clearly not the organisers of the importation, Dean was the courier of the drugs and Henry a willing accomplice with both women being paid for their roles.”
Anyone with information on drug smuggling can report it anonymously via 0800 735 5555.
